https://files.catbox.moe/r3oru2.png

- My Qwen 3.6 result had sun and cloud in sky, similar to the second Opus 4.7 result in Simon's post.

- My Qwen 3.6 result had no grass (except as a green line), but all three results in Simon's post had grass (thick).

- My Qwen 3.6 result had visible "tailing air motion" like Simon's Qwen 3.6 result.

- My Qwen 3.6 result had a "sun with halo" effect that none of Simon's results had.

But, I know, it's more about the pelican and the bicycle.

Are you somehow showing raw markdown source text and also rendered markdown in Obsidian side by side? That would sound awesome.

IDK if such was the intent, of course.

You could hook it up to some workflow over the local API depending on how you want to dump the text, but the web UI is good too.

The Show HN by the author was at: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44145564

The macOS built-in TTS (dictation) seems better than all the 3rd party, local apps I tried in the past that people raved about. I have tried several.

Is this better somehow?

If the 3rd party apps did streaming with typing in place and corrections within a reasonable window when they understand things better given more context, that would be cool. Theoretically, a custom model or UX could be "better" than what comes free built into macOS (more accurate or customizable).

But when I contacted the developer of my favorite one they said that would be pretty hard to implement due to having to go back and make corrections in the active field, etc.

I assume streaming STT in these utilities for Mac will get better at some point, but I haven't seen it yet (been waiting). It seems these tools generally are not streaming, e.g. they want you to finish speaking first before showing you anything. Which doesn't work for me when I'm dictating. I want to see what I've been saying lately, to jog my memory about what I've just said and help guide the next thing I'm about to say. I certainly don't want to split my attention by manually toggling the control (whether PTT or not) periodically to indicate "ok, you can render what I just said now".

I guess "hold-to-talk" tools are for delivering discrete, fully formed messages, not for longer, running dictation.

AFAICT, TFA is focused on hold-to-talk as the differentiator, over double-tap to begin speaking and double-tap to end speaking?

Make calls? Support the latest banking/travel/communication app updates? Run any old VOIP app in a pinch as a true "backup phone"? Simply connect to wifi and browse the web? Just play basic media?

The older they are, the less they will have support for recent app versions or "modern" websites.

But there are some good old iPhones under $100. Whether it does what you need it do, to serve as a backup, depends a lot on what sort of functionality you are backing up.

Go on Swappa, sort unlocked iPhones by low price, pick one with good photos and description in your budget. Ask an LLM what limitations it will have, since at that price it will probably have some compared with what a new phone can do.

Also, if you think Google search gives surface-level results and is a poor option, I hate to say it, but I highly suggest learning how to use Google better, if that applies. It sounds like this is not you, but IMO Google only sucks badly if you use it wrong? I mean, I get the SEO-enshittification and the censorship problem and all that (or: building for the masses and for advertisers), but for most topics it works well enough if used as a power user (so, not just pasting in what you are looking for), IME. You probably know all this, but:

  - require keywords or key phrases with quotation marks
  - AND your required text: multiple phrases, each about a "concept" from the article, or something that marks/signifies of a related concept or take you want  to know more about
  - use minus sign for negative required words (so, excluded quoted phrases) if needed
  - (Some of these used to not work for a while but I think that was along time ago and they pretty much work again?)
  - restrict the query to specific domains or TLDs (site:youtube.com; or *.edu or *.gov, etc)
  - etc.

Can you give a concrete example where the standard methods fail?

Finally, searching HN itself is a great option IMO.

Alternatively: there's plenty of mainstream, accepted science that's plain, flat out, provably wrong. Yet, it is against good taste (job security, people's feelings, status quo bias, etc.) to point this out.

Hence, it can actually be tricky to catch wind of, or get a grasp on, such issues to begin with, much less pursue such issues toward meaningful, published, recognized change in understanding (that is to say: paradigm shift).

I'd name some examples, but you wouldn't believe me.

With respect to the article, it seems the current LLMs can (though, obviously, do not necessarily have to) return text that appears to reason (pretty reasonably!) about paradigm shifts, when given the context required and nudged quite forcefully toward particular directions. But, as the article seems to indicate, the LLMs seem to not tend toward finding, investigating, and reporting on paradigm shifts all on their own very much. (But maybe part of that is intrinsic to how they are programmed and/or their context?)

But doesn't the latest Orion on iOS 26-latest just turn the top section a solid color (e.g., web page background-color), simply not showing any text up there around the notch/top-edge? As the parent said about the accessibility option, "...resembles the last generation of iPhones with home button from 2017" (albeit, at least not solid black/white only)?

Previously on iPhones, IIRC, we got text scrolling up above and around the notch/icons, to really make maximum use of the screen (except where truly unavoidable), IIRC.

AFAICT, Orion and the accessibility setting do stop the fading-distraction, but do not restore the use of that screen space for text/content.

When scrolling/reading a web page, it literally changes that section of the text so that it fades to gray.

So, "everything scroll fades".

I couldn't find a way to turn it off. Quite irritating, IMHO.

EDITED TO ADD ELABORATION: The issue with iOS "scroll fade" text color in Safari near the top notch is that this makes that top-edge-text "dynamic" (changing) and thus "draws attention" to it visually, thus competing for eyeball attention when I am probably actually reading somewhere further down on the page. Also, I would still like to be able to glance up to the topmost visible text if wanted, without having to adjust to its different and less visible colors. Apple designers should know all this. Further, I'd say the page text color should probably by default respect what the web page designer configured it as, and not have the OS change that text color (unless the user gets fancy and requests an override with dark mode or whatever settings).

This article's critique seems valid, too (more generically about "scroll fade" in interfaces, e.g. web pages, which seems to mostly be about items appearing gradually via motion). Personally, I see less of that these days, compared to making every page in an OS fade out where unnecessary.

Even hardcover books from "real publishers" have arrived with low print quality. The most common problem book-printing problems I have a real problem with today are

  1. text that is gray (not black) and
  2. text that is dotted (not solid)

If you ask me, the following checkboxes should be standard ratings on all books sold:

  [ ] "solid, black text"
  [ ] "acid-free paper"
  [ ] 

Related, I used to buy 3rd party black laser printer toner that was guaranteed and warrantied to be made to OEM spec. It never, ever was, no matter how many returns/replacements/retries/print-settings-adjustments/other-part-replacements. Always gray text, always. Buying actual OEM black toner reliably results in (close enough to) jet black text. It costs more, but it's the only way to be sure for self-printed materials AFAIAA.

- Copilot: Great at finding and discussing docs, conversations, and other work items that it is connected to. For everything else, it seems somehow less smart than the others (YMMV).

Emphasis on the YMMV, obviously. Maybe my impression is colored by a small number of unlucky, less than stellar experiences (comparatively speaking).

Recent media coverage:

https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/12/channel-surfer-watch-youtu...

https://www.theverge.com/tech/893598/this-is-immediately-my-...

https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/youtube/this-web-app-...

https://hackaday.com/2025/10/17/channel-surfing-nostalgia-ma...

- Perplexity: This one has been promoted on (insert general audience media skewing toward the older set) enough to be a household name still.

- ChatGPT: General people in some demographics (see immediately above) are averse to this, on account of negative publicity its parent company has received. (Still very strong popularity and positive sentiment in some demographics, though)

- Claude: Some semi-literates have glommed onto this one, possibly as a result of its more recent success among the developer set.

- Grok: People can be either for or against, based on how they feel about its owning company and its ownership; no more need be said

- Gemini: Again, if you are in the universe of its owning company (or decidedly not), the draw (or repulsion) can be strong here.

For general LLM use, the above are all about the same. To be clear, this is just me shooting from the hip for how each offering might be viewed. IMO, it's not a bad idea to submit the same input to each and see how they compare, if one is so inclined.

Cool tech, but I don't want it scanning my junk especially, no thanks. I'll just apply Betteridge's law of headlines to the article "You Asked: Are Airport Body Scanners Safe?" at https://time.com/4909615/airport-body-scanners-safe/ and go on my merry way.

The TSA definitely seems to intentionally make me wait unnecessarily long for my patdowns to commence.

The attitude among some TSA employees can be truly confrontational when I'm nothing but polite.

One of them literally shoved their hand so fast and so far up my leg, it stung my private area for a good little while after. Now, whenever their script comes to the point where they ask if there is anything they should know, I have to ask them to not do that please, since it has happened before.

If there is a list of people to be first in line for UBI instead of whatever they do now, I'm okay if it's everybody at the TSA, and I'm guessing that they would be cool with that, too.

Are you absolutely certain that there is not an unexplained uptick in brain damaged newborns/children in the USA?

And that its cause is not some thing(s) that "almost every" one of them is subjected to repeatedly?

And that it is not just a case of better/more/over diagnosis?

IDK about by you, but there are literal nurseries/schools for the brain-damaged kids popping up on Main Street. That's how many there seem to be.

So yeah, maybe they're not in that study. But that means they don't exist?

The time, and also the proximity.

As I understand it, the potential dangers of a lot of these kinds of things dissipate quite rapidly with distance.

But with wearables, the emitters are quite literally strapped against the body (practically zero distance).

> Has there been any new information since then?

Since you asked, there apparently was a 2017 followup book by the same author. These links are for that book:

https://harvoa.org/chs/pr/dusbk2.htm

https://www.amazon.com/Ultrasound-Causation-Microcephaly-Vir...

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36466945-ultrasound-caus...