Canadian software engineer living in Europe.
I was dubious. “What could this possibly do” I thought, “that yt-dlp can’t?”.
I pointed it at a video on Substack that I’ve been wanting to watch offline (that platform is just shite) and after a little getting tripped up by the UI… boom. 1hr of video just in my Downloads/ folder.
Thanks. This is pretty great.
Oh yeah, totally my bad. I hadn’t realised that there were three people in this thread! I’m not intoxicated, though I am quite tired. I’m signing off on this whole thread now.
Here’s you:
Your entire tone comes across pretentious, presumptuous and hostile. I’m glad most of the country doesn’t think or act like you.
Also you:
At what fucking point did a comment about her husband diminish one iota of her success? Is that a risk in your world, and all it says about your respect for women?
Holy fuck.
You might want to re-evaluate just who’s being hostile here. I’ll own the pretentious label though. I’m not trying to come off that way, but I’ve been told that my writing can sometimes read like that.
I have been to funerals for women, funerals where they highlight at the funeral the accomplishments of the woman’s dead husband. This sort of sexism is far more common than you appear to believe. The fact that you jumped to the accomplishments of Chow’s long-dead husband in the face of her monumental current achievements is, whether you want to acknowledge it or not, sexism. Had you diminished her achievements and compared them to Layton’s that’d be sexist too — worse really — but that doesn’t make your initial comment any better.
I get it, nobody likes it when people point out something you’ve done as shitty. It’s especially bad when you don’t think the label fits because you don’t recognise what you’ve said as terrible, and the intent wasn’t there. But that’s how this stuff works, it’s why sexism is systemic rather than explicit. It’s the water we’re swimming in and it’s often not easy to recognise.
I get that you weren’t trying to be shitty here, but you said a shitty thing. Maybe you don’t see it yet, but I’m hoping that this will at least start you on the path to getting you there some day.
It’s not a reflection on Jack. I loved him. So much that I campaigned for him pretty hard as I was living in his riding: phonebanking, door knocking, the whole deal. It’s not about him, which is rather the point. It was a post about an entirely different person’s accomplishments, and your first and only comment was to talk about how great her husband was. That’s sexist.
If it helps, consider the absurdity of switching the sexes.
Jack and Olivia are married for some time, each with their own accomplishments. Olivia starts a promising career as leader of the NDP and tragically dies of Cancer. Jack spends the next 15 years doing great things in Toronto, working into a role as the new mayor. He’s got fans and supporters and laundry list of accomplishments. He wins another election, and someone chimes in to say: “I miss Olivia. She was great”.
The only rational answer to that is:
“What the fuck does Olivia have to do with this? She’s been dead for 15 years. This is Jack’s accomplishment.”
Of course, no one would say something like that because it’s absurd. Even if long-dead-Olivia was great, that greatness is irrelevant to Jack’s massive achievement. Citing it, intentionally or not, is to somehow ascribe her greatness to him, and that’s pretty silly.
And yet people do it to women all the time.
If, after 15 years, someone’s first and only response to a woman’s success is to talk about her husband, that’s sexism.
Jack Layton has been dead for 15 years. At some point his wife’s wins should be considered her own.
Yes of course they do. It’s important (to them) that we alternate exclusively between right-wingers in red and right-wingers in blue. If they allow socialists into power even once, the Overton window will be dragged to the left and their owners can’t allow that.
That’s a weird way to say “we’re cooking the planet”.
He compared an LLM to a compiler suggesting that the concerns about using them are the same as suggesting that everyone should write in assembly.
The comparison is invalid, since one mode is deterministic, while the other is not.
LLM-driven development leads to programming via the abstraction of the model, disconnecting you from the source to the point where you don’t understand what it’s done or why. He’s suggesting that this isn’t a problem because an LLM is just like a compiler, which suggests that he’s arguing in bad faith or doesn’t understand the “tools” he’s using.
Does he… think LLMs are deterministic?
Your work lets you use Linux?
“Regret” what exactly? Helping the people trying to erase them?
Honestly? Gentoo. It’s got a steep learning curve, but the docs are great and after your first install, you’ll know more about Linux than most users.
I really enjoyed Elizabeth May’s “Losing Confidence” if you’re into nonfiction.
I’d be more upset about this if cars were also fitted with speed limiters.
and I don’t see any value in limiting classification to the domain level. How would one classify wikipedia.org in this scenario? Would it not make more sense to define an open standard that’d leverage this system but allow domain managers to define it themselves?
To take my university.tld as the example, that university might host a file called at https://university.tld/ocs.json that looks something like this:
{
"/": "EDU"
"/math": "MAT",
"/journalism": "JOU",
}
(Heads up to OP: there’s no journalism in your current spec. That feels like an oversight.)
This would allow the high-content site admins to classify parts of the site differently. The /ocs.json file might even be dynamically generated for complex sites like Wikipedia.
I’m curious as to why you’d limit this to the domain level. A university for example might have thousands of URLs in it with wildly different subjects:
university.tld/math/student-name/thesis-on-mathy-subject/university.tld/journalism/student-name/big-story-about-politicsHow would your system account for this?
You’re making a lot of assumptions that have yet to be backed up with evidence. There have been a lot of inventions that people claimed were revolutionary and “here to stay” that have since been confined to history has a bad idea: blockchain and NFTs most recently, asbestos & DDT somewhat further back. Just because boosters like yourself have drunk the kool-aid is not sufficient evidence for your claim.
But that’s beside the point. The Canadian government doesn’t need to pour public funds into “AI” for it to succeed. Indeed if it’s as revolutionary as you claim, the public will spend their own funds or demand their taxes cover it… but they aren’t, are they? The public overwhelmingly hate it save for base entertainment. That’s not revolution, it’s very expensive porn, temporarily subsided by billionaires.
The cost of “AI” is astronomical, and I’m not just talking about the finances. The environmental cost is civilisation-crippling, and the benefits produced so far amount to [checks notes] a net loss in the hundreds of billions of dollars, stolen culture, skill atrophy, loss of agency, oh! and psychosis.
Put the kool-aid down friend and try looking at this more objectively. It’s a non-solution for a problem we don’t have that’s causing incalculable harm. Public money should not be funding it.
It just wasn’t clear what was being downloaded.
For example, here’s a screenshot of the UI when I tried to use it on this page (I was logged in at the time, which grants access to the full video):
The UI presents 3 options, all of which are basically identical, each with impossible file sizes. I ended up clicking
[Preview]on each of them 'til I found the full-length video. The preview opens up in a new tab, rather than inline or in a pop-up which wasn’t ideal (I had like 20 tabs open, now my extension tab was on the left and the preview for one of the streams was way over on the right).It worked well though, once I had the above figured out. Here are my suggestions if you’re interested:
Regardless, it’s a great job, so thank you for sharing it! Now I can watch Zeteo videos on my own time without that useless Substack app!