Normalizing glasses that look like Facebook perv glasses isn’t something I would want.
i like my gold-mirrored clipons too much to drift
Well not nothing. They do block the sun.
so can litery anything else
Clear glass. A ziplock bag. Wind. Thoughts and prayers. Sunblock - dammit.
That’s cool. Way cooler if they were polarized though.
Did you read the link?
No - at least I’m homest. By your reply I guess they are. Thanks.
Will these work for the upcoming eclipse?
I assume you are joking but just in case you aren’t: no, regular sunglasses are never sufficient for protecting your eyes from an eclipse.
The most wild feature avout my sunglasses are that they have air pockets in the arms so they float if dropped in water.
I got one of those foam things that stick to the arms and make it float
Great for fishing
But of course it does something. It blocks light, and let a man stare at boobs discreetly.
Hey, don’t be sexist… They also let women stare at boobs discreetly
You’re right. Women also like to stare at boobs.
Another use case I failed to mention: staring at butts.
my socks also lack video recording or generative AI integration. perhaps i should sell them to eBay
They’ll go for more if you don’t wash them before selling.
I took the time to read the fine print, and these glasses appear to sense the vector of reflected light and specifically filter out waves with a horizontal orientation. The processimg power needed to do this will mean these must have an uncomfortably large battery or require frequent charging.
Polarization is kind of just magic. Which means these sunglasses might actually require mana points to use.
Fortunately it’s that awe inspiring battery technology where the power can be remotely stored and transmitted over millions of kilometers.
Quantum Power™©
I think it uses nanotechnology to just do it automatically.
Think it will require age verification?
I have a pair of prescription, self darkening lenses in cheap frames that look like the DDG ones, and no one has ever given me a second glance when I wear them in public places.
People give me second looks, but that’s more because they’re sexy AF.
On an only semi-related note, photochromics are super dope and are definitely one of those technologies that make me feel like I’m living in the cool future we were promised.
I thought that too for a while, but the shine has worn off of photochromics for me because all the ones I’ve owned have lasted grand total of about a year or in some cases less before they’ve worn out and no longer darken in the sun. The longest lasting chunk of the stuff I’ve ever managed to own was the visor on my motorcycle helmet, a Bell Qualifier DLX, but that also had the tradeoff of never actually getting dark enough to be useful so I had to wear normal sunglasses under it anyway which really rather defeats the purpose.
Instead when I’m feeling particularly cyberpunk these days I bust out my old pair of CTRL shades. They have their own inherent drawback though, in that even though I managed to score my pair free through my job at the time I’m still afraid to do anything heavy duty while wearing them lest I break the damn things. That’s because it’d cost me $300 for another pair.
That’s totally fair. Ive never owned a pair since there isnt really a reason if you dont need prescription glasses so I didnt realize they could wear out so fast, but the concept and material science is really cool nonetheless
While we’re talking about glasses technology, it seems like oil resistant coatings have finally gotten really good. My eyebrows are pretty oily and would smear on the top middle corners of my glasses all the time. But my latest pair just has a tiny bit of smudging there. I can press them against my face and wiggle my eyebrows right against them and it’s still only a bit smudged.
deleted by creator
Sunglasses dont do ‘absolitely nothing’.
People will constantly cry about the fact that I’m not putting on sunscreen while they’re going out in the sun without sunglasses.
People are dumb. I could technically remove a cancerous mole myself, I can’t remove eye cancer myself. Or somehow unfuck my eyes once they’re damaged.
If you think you’re able to just remove skin cancer yourself, sorry but holy shit you’re delusional.
technically
If I cut the arm that has the cancerous mole on it off - the skin cancer is gone. Granted, I was thinking more carving it out - you know, the way doctors do.
look up „metastasis“ if your cancer does this, you cant just remove an visible „mole“. Its a bad idea anyway but with metastasis its impossible
No. Do not do this. This is how you end up with terrible cancer that spreads. Doctors don’t just start hacking away to carve out skin cancer. You are absolutely delusional or terribly misinformed like the person above said if you think you can just cut off the cancer at home.
It quite literally is just hacking away you moron - my uncle has had hundreds of cancerous moles removed, they literally cut away more flesh than just the mole to ensure the cancer doesn’t spread.
Fucks sake
This is you:
I could technically remove a cancerous mole myself.
Since you’re the smart one, and we’re all morons, I’ll defer to your expertise. You should totally just hack away at your suspected cancerous moles at home. Probably you should use a dull kitchen knife or whatever. Good luck!
And you’re sitting here suggesting that I’m wrong about cutting your fucking arm off to get rid of cancer.
Of course I’m not advocating that someone back alley ripper docs the fucking cancer out you trog
DuckDuckGo should apply this lesson to their search engine!
I maintain that this should be the default behavior and the AI be opt-in
When you use the site for the first time and search something where AI overview is available, it shows a toggle for how often you want to see it, with “sometimes” as middle ground being the default. Without showing that a feature exists, it’s hard to decide if you want to use it or not. And since peoples opinion about it seems pretty spit, I think that is pretty valid.
Or would you rather have a cookie-popup like choice box pop up every time you use the service without cookies enabled asking you for your preference? Because that would annoy me very much.
I would argue a good 99% of what we experience in life should be opt-in and yet here we are. Use of AI, companies getting our data, etc is all opt-out meanwhile organ donation is opt-in. Wtf.
AI is the future of search and I dont see anyway that changes. The user experience of AI search is way to good, average users love the summary at the top of their search. Almost every report i’ve seen shows over 50% of people using AI for search and that tracks with what I see in people i know in real life.
I’m a DDG user and I do not want them to handicap themselves to pass a purity test.
Having a search algorithm be AI based and having an LLM summary of “the web” is two completely different things.
over 50% of people using AI for search
Of course they do, 50% of the users don’t fucking know how to disable it or that you can change search engine
Then opt in. We shouldn’t have to opt out to avoid padding the AI numbers.
Its a generalized product targeting average people. Average people dont care AI/No AI they want the results and they use the AI summaries. If DDG hid it then they would just think it doesnt exist and go use google which provides them faster more convenient results.
We’re talking about the same duckduckgo that had a huge poll about this right? The only data point that exists regarding what people want is that of the 175,354 users who took the poll, only 10% wanted AI features.
And I bet those 10% were willing to opt in. Fucking sloppers incapable of giving a shit about truth. They want to kill the very concept. They’re literally enemies of truth. Even fucking skeletor didn’t hate the fucking concept of truth.
Yes we are talking about ddg which has roughly 100 million users and put out a poll to which 175k said they didnt want AI.
Also, in my experience people who dislike AI features are often more tech-savvy in my experience. And tech-savvy people tend to know “hidden” subdomains such as “noai.” and how to change the default engine’s URL string whereas non-savvy tend to not know that.
So even if the majority would be against these AI features it might make more sense to make AI the default and noai opt-in. Because you’d lose more non-savvy people having no-AI as default than you lose tech-savvy people with having AI as default (I assume).
Maybe im to tech-brained but I dont think its a technical barrier. I think that they just dont care enough. One search of “how to remove AI from DDG” would bring it up but they never care about the issue enough to take that first step.
I sometimes observe this with my family members, who will complain “oh I dont like how it does X” and I say you can turn that off in the settings and then they dont. It was a minor complain they had but not an actual complain they wanted to solve.
Maybe DDG should do the firefox route of a popup to disable all AI for new users.
Almost every report i’ve seen shows over 50% of people using AI for search
Because it’s not possible to search without there being an AI summary
No these are not reports that count someone viewing an AI summary on google as using AI for search.
then how do they count it? home else could someone be counting “AI usage in the search engine”?
I checked again to get a more up to date report and so that we actually have something to go off instead of my memory of some random reports. Pew finds 50% of people use chatbots and the most common use is searching for information. Also in the report the have a stat for reading AI summaries at the top of a search and that is 60% say that have, 10% dont know and 30% dont read it. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2026/06/17/americans-and-ai-2026-chatbots-smart-devices-and-views-on-impact/
So its fair to say I was wrong and its not over 50% but its close to 50%.
At least with Google, you can type and respond directly with the AI summary.
AI is the future of search
Thought terminating cliches are the future of online discourse.
The user experience of AI search is way to good
Search engine companies went out of their way to make normal searches worse, and then introduced AI search to keep you on their sites.
I thought everybody at this point understood enshittification at this point, but if not: of course a project at the first stage of enshittification acts better than a different product at the third stage of it.
Its not a thought terminating cliche if you didnt cut the next word out. You can argue if AI is the future of search, I think there is a strong case that its proven very good at general information retrieval.
How did search engine companies go out of their way to make normal searches worse? I search I get relevant results and its been that way for the past 20 years. Nothing has changed that has made search worse than it was 5 years ago. The only change is that people have recently gotten a choice between a google search or a chatgpt question and they were increasingly choosing chatgpt. fast forward to current day and that divide has only increased.
Its not a thought terminating cliche if you didnt cut the next word out
“Of”? I assume you mean the next two words, but not only doesn’t it change anything, I think it makes my response match even better. So I added them to the quote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Searching
This used to be a bare bones version of what you could do on literally every search engine. I had a high school class about this. 50/50 whether you got a ‘business’ teacher who didn’t know how to open PDF or the librarian who’d go on digressions about information theory and optimal solutions.
In the late 2010s google followed immediately by other large search engines started removing these features and actively showing users worse results so they would do more searches and get shown more ads.
Your shit won’t fly here, slopper.
You can still search on search engines some searches dont even have any ads. So what feature was removed? They actively started showing worse results ok what did they do?
Search engines still search same as they did in the 2010s. They have had ads for decades. It hasnt increased you search you see an ad or two or even none.
Your replies are equivalent to AI slop. If you are going to write something please at least think about what you are writing.
Sloppers are like enemies of the concept of truth just for it’s own sake, which is a bizzaire level of evil I never expected to see.
Ai search results are ass
Asses are cute sometimes. They can also be great for sex!
Neither virtue possessed by “ai” search results.
Didn’t google actively degrade their search engine to force more adverts in. and I should imagine a further degradation since AI summery to make us more dependent.
I’m looking forward to when AI fully closes-in, people are deskilled and the key holders are able to pump coercive non explicit adverting into AI, we won’t even realize we had been sold something we didn’t already want /s
People have said that and ive read a few studies. Its a truism because the search quality degraded but mostly due to SEO and link spam. If someone wants to post actual evidence of google “actively making search worse” I’d love to read it. So far i only saw that it was due to SEO spam which affects all search providers. While people here are trying to claim it was done nefariously to force people towards AI.
I dont think AI summary is ever going to be something people NEED. In most cases its better and it will cover majority of searches but its unlikely to cover 100% of cases. You will always need to be able to find things on the web like links.
AI in other areas its not even looking bad for workers. Its largely overhyped from what I see. Programming seems the most useful field but even then its like x0.1 or x0.2 boost in efficiency. This year it got much better. Maybe things will change next year I’ll have to see.
I’ve seen a few articles going over this memo, here’s one article discussing it:
https://rudevulture.com/journalist-explains-why-google-deliberately-made-its-search-engine-worse/
And when I say deskilled, I didn’t mean in the work space, but inability to source information themselves…
Personally I actually like the A.I. summaries… IF it shows its sources. That way it essentially acts as it should, a summary of the search results, and I can click the link that actually is relevant to what I wanted to find in the first place. It skips that step where you have to open the first 5 links and comb through them to find which one is the useful one.
I know most people don’t click those links and just trust the summary directly, but it’s important to me personally. Unfortunately those links only appear sometimes, often you just get plain text with no links.
On DDG you get the sources its summarizing from. Im not sure about google, i dont use it.
Its wrong though. Its wrong so fucking often. There’s no way to fix that. I stopped using ddg because of this. Pandering to right wing idiots does not necessarily mean being smart, that’s thatcherite Nazi coddling lies.
Ignoring the schizo half of your question, what would be an acceptable error rate for you?
That’s relative to the confidence with which its presented. Ten results on a page? I dunno. Only one of them needs to fit, and I can refine my search or check page two… Or used to be able to, before they disabled those features.
A statement at the top of the page? Pretty fucking low. Variable depending on topic, some as low as 0%.
Get fucked sloppy. You’re ruining the world and replacing critical infrastructure for the sake of dystopian bullshit that might collapse at any moment. You’re going to have been cheer leading it along. I hope you end up homeless and hungry-a lot of other people will, but you’ll fucking deserve it.
How is a summary at the top of the page different from the first result? If you are fine with the first result being incorrect I dont see why you wouldnt also accept the summary to be sometimes wrong. There are still 10 results for you to pick from and infinite pages to scroll through.
If it depends on the confidence do you need them to put a disclaimer? If I’m looking for something important I’m going to actual documentation and skipping the summary even when its correct. But if I’m just searching for something low stakes and the summary answers my question I am happy to not dig any further and I consider it to be an improvement on the search experience.
These days its pretty accurate. I rarely come across a summary thats incorrect. Mostly I see incorrect summaries on searches where i already know I’m going to get a lot of wrong answers and have to sift through sites and old posts.
Their AI is terrible
I’d say most people don’t really care
Most people are idiots.
As mostly a person I’m offended!
As an idiot, I am too!
This comment is unnecessarily dismissive and unhelpful.
If people don’t care, then they won’t care if it’s gone either. And that’s the better option.
If enough people were that bothered about a box with an AI overview, it wouldn’t be there. Simple as that. The thing is that the overview turns out to be helpful in some cases, despite what the haters think.
No, the act of a company shoving something bad down people’s throats does not prove it’s what they wanted. You should know this.
We have polls that have calculated people’s sentiment. They are sick of AI .
Ok, if people hate AI so much, you’ll see it being gone soon. No company would want to spend money keeping an useless feature, principally DDG, which is no monopoly.
Also, that poll is about Americans, I don’t give a shit what Americans think.
Recently, my mom killed one of her plants, because she searched for something to use as organic fertilizer and the ai summary suggested to add coffee grounds mixed with water daily. She realized it was a fake information and isn’t trusting anything from internet searchers anymore. I wonder if at some point it will happen to most non-tech people, and search usage will go down heavily.
Coffee grounds can be helpful to add to fertilizer, but you need more than just coffee grounds: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11241280/
wrong.
lol
here’s two links to give you an idea where the AI shit is going:
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/google-data-center-fort-wayne-indiana-wetlands
Folks can configure this as their homepage, search engine, etc.
Exactly my thoughts.
DuckDuckGo (plus AI) enjoys default search engine status on a lot of browsers, and many of them make it difficult to set a custom one (like NoAI). Especially mobile browsers, and apparently even Safari makes it a pain.
(Edited to clarify what I meant by default)
(Firefox) Settings > Search > Default Search engine > Add search engine or select one of the offered ones
Idk about Chrome and the other Chrorium based ones but should be as simple, if not, then you should first think about using a better browser
Settings > Search > Search Engine > DuckDuckGo
I know its not DDG but default behavior is no AI overview (which you can still ger by explicitly asking for it if that’s what you need).
Yep. Usually an AI overview will just piss me off, but sometimes I do want it. In those cases, I add a question mark to the end of my query. It’s easy.
(example: “could you find me 3 different premium pull-down attic ladders and summarize what makes them nice?” because I don’t want to wade through marketing until I have to. Also, y’all, feel free to brag about your attic ladder. Mine is aluminum, feels like it’s going to attack me when I pull it down, and has inadequate hand/guard rail for something next to an open stairway. The scissor-style ones look nice.)
DuckDuckGo has taken a clear stance on generative AI and other LLM-based tools, having asked users whether they wanted AI results fully integrated into search. An overwhelming majority said no, which is why the company now keeps AI content and interactions confined to a separate page.
This is what I get when I run a DuckDuckGo search in a private window. Sure doesn’t look separate to me.
Click “show never” or “on demand”
which is far from
the company now keeps AI content and interactions confined to a separate page.
Didn’t read but should advertise as smart glasses sarcastically
Beautiful, chefs kiss *
Plot twist: goverment applied vaccines through the air and this is government’s survey on side effects.
