However I'm not sure how to best prompt against that behavior without influencing it towards swinging the other way and looking for the most intentionally overengineered solutions instead...

Before Niri I used PaperWM on Gnome with animations disabled and I found that it actually substantially reduces the usability of this sort of workflow for me. I'm not sure how to phrase it, but scrolling WMs feel a little more "physically grounded" and without the animations it was somewhat easy to become briefly disoriented whenever scrolling/opening/resizing/rearranging windows, at least once you start having 4+ workspaces and several screen widths worth of windows on each workspace.

Turning on the animations quickly makes it all snap into place and I never have the brief moment of "feeling lost" after an operation, so it sees inherently important to this WM style. The animations are very fast out of the box and do not feel superfluous.

I've used it for the past few years, but this year had a more slightly more complicated tax situation due to switching investment brokerages and making more trades than usual and I found it kind of annoying to deal with. I switched to FreeTaxUSA this year and it worked quite well, so I'll definitely be using it instead of Credit Karma/Cash App Taxes next year.

I've occasionally run into relatively minor visual issues (I think from before the :has pseudo-class was made generally available in FF) but I cannot think of a single instance where a site was unusable and then worked when I tried it in Chrome.

Since it's just OpenAI's text completion model with a code finetune and without the chat/assistant RLHF, it works much better as an "advanced autocomplete" than ChatGPT or even OpenAI's Turbo model via their API. I can be much more surgical with how I use it (often accepting just a few words at a time), and it's good at following my usual tone.

> https://wojteksychut.com/pic/chatgpt_post_summarization.png

ChatGPT currently has no capability to access external sources, and its training data cuts off at the end of 2021, so there's no way for it to have ever succeeded at this task. It was essentially asked to summarize an article it has never seen, so it hallucinated the entire summary based off of the words in the URL as that is the only information the model was provided. For a more equivalent comparison you'd need to copy the text of the article into the chat input.

Of course that doesn't change the fact that it responded to your query with totally fabricated nonsense, which is a horrible failure mode that points to why it can be so hard to trust LLMs' responses, but I do believe the disclaimer popup that appears when you launch ChatGPT notes this particular limitation.

The difference in results quality is stark. On Kagi I have to !g maybe once every few days, and usually I don't find what I'm looking for on Google either, but on Brave it feels like I do it for a third of my searches, often for ones where I actually know exactly which result I want and am using the search engine as a shortcut. So whatever Kagi is doing, it's definitely not "Just Bing".

From their Discord, it is apparently some combination of Bing+Google+their own small index, which makes sense because for niche searches where Bing and Brave completely fail, Kagi's results seem to closely mirror Google's, with the benefit of its result boosting and filtering features. For more common searches it seems to match or surpass Google regularly.

I've just switched to the annual plan to lock in my current $10 unlimited searches rate, and will re-evaluate after a year. I can't justify $25 a month, but looking at my history (and guessing how much I'd need if I moved all of my Brave searches to Kagi) I may not actually need more than 1000 included + 200-500 pay-as-you-go searches per month, which is juuuust on the boundary of what I'd be willing to pay.

I spent an embarrassingly long time trying to track down some bizarre number parsing bug or obscure culture-specific behavior before realizing it was actually just users' cursors being over the number input while they tried to scroll, causing them to inadvertently change values just before submitting the form.

Looking forward to trying it out with this new pricing model.