and the whole swiping from the button [bottom?] kept making the screen go down to the bottom half
This happens to me way more than I would like. For the life of me, I can't figure out the utility in being able to move my lock screen 1/2 way down the phone and have blank space on top. I don't know what this feature is or how I would activate it if I actually wanted to.
That feature is called "reachability" and is designed to let the user access controls at the top of the screen with their thumb. It's a nice idea but triggers unintentionally too often IMO.
Thank you! I couldn't remember the name of it (and didn't feel like digging through menus to find it), so I haven't been able to disable until just now!
It made way more sense when it was introduced with the iPhone 6 Plus because there was still a home button. Much less likely to accidentally trigger it with that compared to the full screens we have now. It’s triggered by swiping down on the bottom of the screen, nowadays essentially the opposite motion of how you’d exit an app. Anyway, you can disable it in Settings > Accessibility > Touch > Reachability.
Apple never sold a flagship ("Pro") iPhone mini. If you wanted the better cameras (particularly the telephoto camera), you had to get the 12 pro or 13 pro. By the 11, they had given the non-Pro models dual lenses, but with the gimmicky 0.5x instead of the more applicable 2x camera.
In the Android ecosystem, to get a good small screen these days you need to get expensive and fragile foldables. The mini phones like Jelly are too compromised on hardware and software.
> not sure why some people are reacting negatively to some poetry...
As another commenter pointed out, the poem is a parody of a Yeats poem. An an extract from another of his poems might offer some insight into the reactions...
> I also don't have any concrete examples jumping to mind
I do (and I may get publicly shamed and shunned for admitting I do such a thing): figuring out how to fix parenthesis matching errors in Clojure code that it's generated.
One coding agent I've used is so bad at this that it falls back to rewriting entire functions and will not recognise that it is probably never going to fix the problem. It just keeps burning rainforest trying one stupid approach after another.
Yes, I realise that this is not a philosophical question, even though it is philosophically repugnant (and objectively so). I am being facetious and trying to work through the PTSD I acquired from the above exercise.
Given that Gemini seems to have frequent availability issues, I wonder if this is a strategy to offload low-hanging fruit (from a human-effort pov) to the user. If it is, I think that's still kinda impressive.
> Today, we’re excited to announce AI Labyrinth, a new mitigation approach that uses AI-generated content to slow down, confuse, and waste the resources of AI Crawlers and other bots that don’t respect “no crawl” directives.
> No real human would go four links deep into a maze of AI-generated nonsense.
... I would. Out of curiosity and amusement I would most definitely do that. Not every time, and not many times, but I would definitely do that one or a few times.
Guess I'm getting added to (yet another) Cloudflare naughty list.
> It is important to us that we don’t generate inaccurate content that contributes to the spread of misinformation on the Internet, so the content we generate is real and related to scientific facts, just not relevant or proprietary to the site being crawled.
In that case wouldn't it be faster and easier to restyle the CSS of wikipedia pages?
Bandwidth isn't free, not at the volume these crawlers scrape at; serving them random data (for example by leading them down an endless tarpit of links that no human would end up visiting) would still incur bandwidth fees.
Also it's not identifiable AI bot traffic that's detected (they mask themselves as regular browsers and hop between domestic IP addresses when blocked), it's just really obviously AI scraper traffic in aggregate: other mass crawlers have no benefit from bringing down their host sites, except for AI.
A search engine has nothing if it brings down the site they're scraping (and has everything to gain from identifying itself as a search engine to try and get favorable request speeds - the only thing they'd need to check is if the site in question isn't serving different data, but that's much cheaper), same with an archive scraper and those two are pretty much the main examples I can think of for most scraping traffic.
In short if you get several million requests and expect to only get 100 you won't know which are the real requests and which are the AI ones - but it is obvious that the vast majority are AI.
I think finding a meaningful way recognise a significant contributor in a way that doesn’t really impact anyone is something to be encouraged. I imagine that most people would use the hex code anyway and only devs/designers would see the name in their tooling.
I can’t see how to apply logic to naming a colour. It’s fundamentally a perceptual and, dare I say it, emotional process.
I also think your comment is uncharitable and tone deaf.
If this thread continues for a few more levels, I think you’ll end up justifying hiring your own private police force.
Ownership requires that a state exists to enforce your rights. There are tradeoffs with this arrangement, one of which is that the state gets to set boundaries/limits on how you can use the thing you own. Ideally, acting with the best interests of the population. This sometimes includes ensuring areas are off limits to transient inhabitants so that a society can develop.
This happens to me way more than I would like. For the life of me, I can't figure out the utility in being able to move my lock screen 1/2 way down the phone and have blank space on top. I don't know what this feature is or how I would activate it if I actually wanted to.