Of course you do. Which is why you won’t get anywhere. It’s always funny to watch though.

Using it has very little impact on me, and allows to continue participating in IRL activities and clubs I’ve been a member of for years.

If they all pack up and move somewhere else, I’ll move as well, if not, I won’t.

I don’t use it for any purpose outside of engaging with those communities and I’m not going to give up my social life to make a statement, I don’t care enough.

If I allow my friends into my home for a visit, does that mean I should shrug when I return home from holiday and find out they’ve helped themselves to its usage without my knowledge or permission to do so?

Heh, that’s what you think modern piracy is? How quaint. In reality I have my own “Netflix”, with access to effectively all media ever created and I click play. That’s it. That’s the entire process. No credit cards, no finding which service has it, no finding out that the service doesn’t have it in my country at this time, no ads. I punch in what I want to watch, I click play, and it plays.

> Nobody is ever going to convince me that pirating is actually easier than finding the thing I want to watch and putting it on my credit card.

Sounds like your problem. Though again, that’s already more steps than it is for me.

> which is that some people don’t want to pay for things

I was happy to pay, and did so for years. Then the services got worse, increasingly fragmented and ever increased in price as service got poorer. Now I’m no longer happy to pay; and have a superior service to boot. The industry successfully convinced me to give piracy up, before driving me back to it a decade later.

Literally none of these things are reality other than for the very specific means you are aware of.

> The streaming services also don’t come with who knows what malware like pirated media can.

What is this, an MPAA pitch from 2007?

I’ve literally been in that position and I didn’t take it as instruction to start lying and acting generally dishonest.

What? It can’t even maintain a stable 30fps on its own target hardware. That’s not an example is point to for something running “well.”

Perhaps where you reside, I’m unsure why you would believe it to be universal.

Their assessment was:

> When interacting with LLMs it feels a lot more like I'm just receiving knowledge passively and I don't think it gets integrated as well.

My point is that the passivity is not necessarily an inherent property of the tool. It depends heavily on an individual chooses to engage with the output.

Saying LLMs make learning passive is a bit like someone else saying books make learning passive because you can skim them without thinking. When we all know instead of reading a book passively you could in addition annotate it, question its claims, summarise it, test yourself, and ultimately apply what you learned. The medium permits both. The same is true of the output of an LLM. You'll get out what you put in and nothing more.

You can use it like a slot machine, repeatedly pulling the lever for another answer without reflecting on any of them. But the fact that a tool permits shallow engagement does not mean shallow engagement is the only option available to you.

That also doesn’t mean every criticism of AI should be dismissed as “incorrect tool usage.” AI has real limitations and deserves serious criticism, and I assure you, I am not popular with the AI hype bros for this reason. However we still need to distinguish between limitations of the tool and consequences of how someone uses it. Not every potentially negative experience is rooted entirely in the technology itself. Sometimes user behaviour is a significant part of the cause.

This sounds like it's more down to how the individual uses the tool. I am not someone who has even been particularly good at reading > learning the thing. I've only ever been capable of learning by doing and with capability to interrogate on the points I don't get. LLMs allow that in a way that is just not feasible with any human being whose tolerance of me would diminish rapidly.

In most cases, I will be writing down my understanding as I would in isolation from a primary source, building flash cards and actively practicing what I have learned, only with more capability to interrogate on the points I have difficulty understanding or need clarity on. Effectively, I am doing the following in a capacity I personally never had via any other means:

> I seem to be doing a lot of integrating and reorganizing my thoughts.

If you are using it as a slot machine of knowledge, and going from receiving > doing with no intermediate step I see how outcomes could differ.

I’ve been playing doom since the original release and I loved it. Different, but I don’t need it to the the same, because the originals and a never ending stream of wads exist.

I think I’m in a minority here. But I really enjoyed it.

It’s just hard for me to be impressed by one of the weakest entries from both a performance and image quality point of view. It’s all subjective though so if others do find it impressive, all the power to them.

I actually think the SW2 port is the most “impressive” handheld experience I’ve seen so far. Given its a superior experience “out of the box” as it were.

And nobody is forcing you too.

> I don't really understand why anyone wants to spend their time playing games with assholes from the internet.

Maybe your experience and preference is not shared equally by all? HN users in particular to seem to struggle with this concept for some reason.

It's in fact one of the least powerful handhelds (of the x86 class.)

> Somehow Cyberpunk 2077 ran really well on it.

With significant dropping of settings across the board, with 30-40fps at best and frequent drops into sub <20fps during the action.

That may count as "really well" depending on your definition I suppose. I wouldnt tolerate it, but i'm sure many would/do.

Too bad the statistics say otherwise.

I am a motorcyclist myself. I just don’t have the will to lie to myself or others.