Maybe on the OS side. However, Vista coincided with the release of Office 2007. That release of Office introduced the dreaded Ribbon, which made functions much harder to find.
I actually like Ribbon and I disagree. It made functions easier to find, for people who didn't have a muscle memory of those functions. It actually taught them how to use the program and exposed conditional menus like picture options better than the toolbars that appear and disappear.
Of course people who got used to traversing 3-level menus got annoyed but they still have all the same keyboard shortcuts. However, spending enough time, you also get used to Ribbon and it usually requires fewer clicks not more.
I still find a tastefully done Ribbon is better than a menu and a toolbar combination. The problem is, not everybody has put the same effort that Microsoft did which created monstrosities like Solidworks Ribbon.
I actually find it difficult to scan for a specific function since the most of the text in the ribbon is centered and may have multiple lines. With the current design, I am expected to look up top to check what tab I am on, then look down bottom to find the container that might have my desired functionality, and then finally scan the middle text (which may be one or two lines) for the button.
When Office 2007 was released, they made a lot of noise about how the ribbon was easy to use. One of the key functionality was Preview - that when the mouse cursor moves inside a button, the change is immediately applied to the content and when the cursor moves outside a button, the change was undone.
They never bothered to implement this Preview functionality on the Web version of office, and I bet only a few ever noticed this inconsistency.
If real people are using the model for real, they will discover for themselves that the data isn’t reliable, and then might switch to a different model.
The incentive will be to maintain a subscriber base.
> If real people are using the model for real, they will discover for themselves that the data isn’t reliable, and then might switch to a different model.
Insanely optimistic view to take. I know a handful of people who make this effort in my personal life, including me, and we tend to be treated as paranoid for caring.
We have laws against undisclosed and misleading advertising, because consumers can't make informed purchases otherwise. What makes you think LLMs will have a fundamentally different pattern than everything else?
And the level of effort required to have these laws applied to false marketers is unrealistic. Unless there is a case of disfigurement or death, it's just caveat emptor.
What would this look like? Whenever I need something like that, I just stick each parameter in its own cell and use functions from there.
I would love an easier way to communicate to tech/math-illiterate CEOs that worst case, average case, and best case are different things, but must all be planned for.
I'd say this would be Depraved Heart Hacking. Technically, OpenAi didn't intend for their agent to hack anyone, but it's the obvious consequence of what they are doing.
Yeah but you can train to perceive the threshold of impending over-hydration and adjust your behavior trigger thresholds to bump up against that more than you bump up against clearly perceived acute dehydration ("very much obviously clearly thirsty").
reply