Krita is among the main reasons why I am so impressed with the KDE project. Not only do they deliver a very good desktop environment, but they also deliver some genuine flagship apps for it
> Depending how the costs of AI detection vs doctor, that genuinely might be enough to shift the math and be a net positive.
Based on my very superficial medical understanding, screening is already the cheap part. But every false-positive would lead to a doctor follow up at best and a biopsy at worst. Not to mention the significant psychological effects this has on a patient.
So I would counter that the potential increase of false-positive MRI scans could be enough to tip off the scale to make screening less useful
> Not to mention that turning gift cards into essentially bank accounts is going to create even more issues. Remember how we have to remind people how paypal isn't a bank?
I would have thought the intention with such regulation as proposed by the original commenter would be that apps specifically stop offering such functionality?
Who actually likes gift cards, as in, would still use them despite better alternatives existing?
If giving/receiving cash wasn't already illegal or socially unacceptable, gift card issuers would have started lobbying for that yesterday.
Other than that original use case, many people use them as a form of poorly functional digital cash (since it's not fungible across issuers) that really ought to exist natively in a currency these days.
I regularly got dunkin donuts, starbucks and the like gift cards for less the face value (sometimes half of face) and therefore strongly preferred using them when I shopped at those stores (at least when I had a balance).
> I think the important part is leaving your phone and other devices home.
The annoying part is that this becomes increasingly difficult to impossible. For example, I can't use public transport without my phone anymore, because my ticket is bound to my phone and the provider does not issue paper tickets or smartcards anymore.
Less severe but equally frustrating, many restaurants choose to use QR codes for menus rather than printing them onto a sheet of paper or writing them to the wall.
I love leaving my phone behind, primarily because I am in the "we're entertaining ourselves to death" crowd considering I essentially grew up with mobile phones already. But our environment is increasingly build on the assumption that we carry a smartphone with us at any given time.
Right, the real test is knowing your device is tucked in the pocket and completely ignoring it. At first it might be hard, but completely doable. Before I start my drive I put my non-peered-to-vehicle phone in my pocket, and it ceases to exist while I drive. Similarly it can be done in any other situation; in this case, a coffee shop.
There is no need to leave it behind, just having the right usage control over it would suffice.
That situation sounds like fun! You let your friend(s) pick something for you. This frees you to do more spontaneous things and keep the social energy flowing. I've personally done this even when there was a printed menu and eating wasn't the point.
I think people need to really lighten up sometimes.
I'm sorry, but what's wrong with asking my partner to choose something for me?
Am I supposed to get upset with what they choose? I'm not saying I would leave. I'm saying I would stay and let someone else pick something for me to eat.
I've been fairly successful at avoiding spots like that myself, also by just walking out. But its completely impractical if you're meeting up with (multiple) people.
> our environment is increasingly build on the assumption that we carry a smartphone with us at any given time.
This is so true! Surprised how many commenters are saying "just have self control" etc - a phone is close to essential for a lot of services in a city.
I'd be super interested in tips people have to avoid the psychological impact phones have when they do have to take them with them. A lot of phones have "relax" or "do not disturb" modes - curious if that actually works for anyone?
> "relax" or "do not disturb" modes - curious if that actually works for anyone?
Ever since I've owned a smartphone, they have been on "do not disturb" 24/7. People that know me know they won't reach me directly, but that I will call them back eventually. I do have a couple of voice calls every day; I schedule them ahead of time based on my own actions, and set an alarm to take out the phone.
I am typically involved in something and I don't want to be disturbed during it; it may just be thinking, or reading, or actually talking to a human being present with me; why would I ever want to be disturbed? I only check my phone when I want to actively perform some task with it anyway, e.g. to look at maps, and then I put it away again. I don't mind carrying it around and needing to use it increasingly for tickets and such. I do not experience this as "self control". I don't have the urge to take out my wallet or keys or umbrella unless I need them either. Why would I.
I typically (also) carry a paper book to read on public transport or in cafés.
I limit the time I can spend on apps that distract me. I can use youtube, twitter, etc. for a combined 30 minutes, then my time is up, and I can only use essential apps (whatsapp, calendar, notes).
On iPhones it's super easy to set up rules like these, using the screen time manager, and then giving the pin to a friend who only gives it to you if you need to change the settings.
On android it's not as easy but solutions also exist.
It's difficult for apps like chrome that are distracting but also useful, I personally also limit chrome, if this means I can't look something up so be it, it's worth it for me.
Why more people aren't doing this is one of the main things that confuses me. People are constantly complaining about using their phone too much, but they don't just do this. I guess I'm an extreme outlier in terms of how willing I am to restrict the actions of my future self.
I've thought about doing that, but it seems to require multiple Google accounts - one for the "child" and one for the "parent", which is hard to achieve without also having multiple SIM cards with different phone numbers that can be used for the account registration. I assume the process is designed to be full of friction to prevent people from freeing themselves of the addiction.
You don't need multiple SIM cards; you can just create new Google accounts. I have my main google account set as the child of a different account and it works great. But the set up was somewhat annoying, took me a couple hours.
I've been postponing writing a guide on how to set this up for a while, but I think I'm motivated to do it now, I'll try to have something up by the 8th here https://tim2othy.github.io/ws/screen-time/, maybe useful for you.
I'm thinking more and more of doing that, but prompted by the fact that the phone is a second-factor authenticator for so many things. I really don't want to lose that phone. I should just leave it home and carry another one just for urgent stuff.
It's just a matter of developing some self control. Be conscious about when you really need your phone (using it to pay or as your ticket) vs using is to pass time (doom scrolling X or HN)
It certainly is when you only look at the social media aspect of it. But always carrying a phone with you also brings an availability aspect with it. I know that saying "develop some self control" is usually a well intended advice, but it is very challenging for some people considering they are carrying their "trigger" basically everywhere.
You can puy the phone in silent mode and put it in your bag. I'm not blind to how addictive these blavk rectangles are but they're not the One Ring. The can be used like a tool then put back in their box.
Ours do the same but I just ask and are normally happy to talk. Personally I think the staff enjoy it as they get a few minutes of talk time rather than rush rush next order.
I fairly often go out with just my Garmin watch and an ereader (Boox 6”, which is just about pocketable).
I can sync music to it and use it for contactless payments, which is just about enough.
It’s possible to do a bit more but it’s more basic than an Apple Watch as a smartphone alternative (but much better for everything I want it for), and as I mostly use it for sports tracking and being phoneless, I haven’t set any other apps up.
You don't have to leave your phone at home to be free of distractions. You can restrict your phone instead. I'm just a happy user, see techlockdown.com.
Their marketing is geared towards the p*rnography addiction crowd but from my own experience, it works equally well for those easily distracted by screens (I have ADHD).
Oh without the exception of the occasional ticket checks or checking a connecting train, there really is no actual reason. But as everybody knows, old habits die hard.
Humans are not rational. Even if you are 99% of the time, with a smartphone in your pocket there's a good chance you will use it for your emotional 1% within 2hours (and unravel). Read Rutger Bregman's goal for 2026: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2026/jan/04/lifes-t...
As a parent of young children I've found that I need my phone on any time my children are not with me. Calls from school or day care don't always come from the same number, so I answer every call when my kids are in the care of others (but none otherwise).
Then practice keeping your phone in your pocket for increasingly long periods of time. You may need to build up to this and to develop some level of control.
Child care now requires parents to be readily available, especially to pick up children who are sick. A century ago, child care providers were expected to care for sick children until the parent arrived. Failure to be responsive would be a violation of the child care agreement.
Is this really true? There are millions of parents who are unreachable while working. A surgeon isn’t going to be able to leave in the middle of surgery to pick up their kid from child care.
My kid got sick at daycare one time when I was over an hour away. They just had to stay there while I worked my way back.
I don't think that's a counter example. Our day care requested sick kids to be picked up within an hour. A single late pickup of a sick kid due to traffic/distance would be handled normally. An unreachable parent who turns off their phone and is extremely delayed, especially on multiple occasions is a very different thing.
When we looked at in-home child care, one of the options was a nanny who would care for kids even when the kids were sick. So I'm sure the rapid-pickup-of-sick-kids policy isn't universal. However, our day care had that policy and we made sure we knew who was "on-call" to get kids when important meetings or work travel impacted our availability.
The problem with the reliance on self control is the self control. You have it or you don't. While I generally agree just exercising pure self control may be a viable strategy for some, it does not work for everyone. Particularly people with ADHD do have a tendency to be easily captured by screens.
I've personally struggled with adherence to my reduce screen time goals and while exercising more self control has helped, making active choices about my environment did help a lot more. And I like it that way, and I hate to see these choices be torpedoed all the time
Self-control is not a "have it or don't" thing. It can be developed and exercised, often simply by trying and failing, and then trying again (like any exercise!).
I'm not saying it's not harder for some people than others. I'm also not saying that it isn't harder to exercise on some circumstances than others. However, it's absolutely not a binary thing, and it is achievable, in some form, for anyone.
It's also about building systems to help with self control. Turning alerts off would be one. Leaving the phone in another room for longer periods of time is another.
easier for some brains than others, no? It's a sad loss of agency (for those whom it matters) to not be able to make such a simple choice to control the environmental conditions they are weak to
but i am genuinely glad for people who find that level of self-control readily accessible, that's just not me.
There's some interesting implications around the "default mode network" that's worth thinking about, and the sort of world we might be inadvertently bending toward [building] when everyone is constantly struggling to engage internal control mechanisms and depleting their ability to do other unconscious sorts of processing: https://archive.is/fYqtB
Very interesting talk! I think it is quite cool that Miele and BSH reached out when they saw the event announcements to make sure there are not any issues they're not aware of. Seems like a productive experience for all involved!
The WiFi implementation was interesting to me, I am glad that it is reasonably safe. I understand much of the skepticism around these kinds of features, but I also see the value in many settings. As long as they remain optional, I think the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Kudos for BSH having good developer documentation and a local mode. I feel like a local mode should be mandatory, for safety and support reasons
I still fail to see the regulation inflation. It is not like there was an absence of regulation before the EU. But now once you comply with EU regulation, you have access to a significantly larger market than before, where you had to comply with national regulations.
So yeah, depending on what market your institution is from, you might see an increase in regulation. But changes are, once you expand beyond national borders, you have less regulation to deal with as compared to before the EU.
AI, RGPD/DSA/etc, yearly money laundering regs are a good example. They come on top of local regulations, they don't replace them. Each country still has its own special laws.
> Why should water be public infra but food is not?
The main reason why infrastructure of any kind (water, sewage, etc) is a public infrastructure - even in largely privatized economies - is that infrastructure is essentially a natural monopoly. Food on the other hand isn't and it can largely be traded as a commodity (which is, at least in my opinion, a major reason why our food system is so broken).
If your only expectation is that it provides enough calories for your population, you are absolutely right. If you have a look at the bigger picture, the issues are plentiful. On the producer side, farmers are operating at relatively thin margins which encourages consolidation and unsustainable farming practices. This in turn leads to extensive soil degradation and fertilizer use, which is unsustainable - both financially and ecologically.
On the consumer side, people are becoming more overweight (which cannot be exclusively be attributed to the food system, but diet of course plays a significant role). Food is becoming more expensive and lower quality. Food waste also still is a major problem.
Many issues are shared between the US and the European food system, although they may not be as extreme as in the US. However, it does not feel like there is actual political will to steer the ship in a different direction.
During 2025 I've almost exhausted my personal TODO-list of small applications and created a few extra ones.
This would've never happened without a Claude Pro (+ChatGPT) subscription.
And as I'm not American, none of them are aimed to be subscription based SaaS offerings, they're just simple CLI applications for my personal use. If someone else enjoys them, good for them. =)
I don't care about industry metrics when I'm building my own AI research robotics platform and it's doing what I ask it to do, proving itself in the real world far better than any performative best-practice theatrics in the service of risible MBA-grade effluvia masquerading as critical discourse.
I feel this is a generally strange situation. TVs seem to be pretty much the only tech that is somehow inflation proof, and that is largely due to the surveillance capitalist approach they come with.
I am a strong privacy advocate, but I also believe in customers choice. Hence, the primary issue I have with this technology is not its existence, but the lack of transparency in the pricing and the inability to truly properly opt out of this data collection.
At some point in the past year, I‘ve read someone suggest a „privacy label“ for electronics, akin to the energy efficiency labels that exist around the world. The manufacturers should be forced to disclose the extend of the data collection as well as the purpose and the ability to opt out on the product packaging, before the customer makes the purchase
I would be curious to see a comparison of the T&Cs in these TVs.
I generally agree that reading the T&C is on the user and you cannot blame the lack if transparency onto the company, IF the T&C are sufficiently comprehensible. Some T&Cs I‘ve read are written in obscure enough legalese that it might as well be considered hidden information
So you buy a new TV, unpack and install it, and then when the whole family is gathered around, you suddenly get this confirmation on the TV if you agree with their T&C. Are you supposed to reject them and return the TV at this point? T&C should be part of the purchase agreement, instead of being forced upon the user while using the product after purchase. Any one-sided change of T&C after purchase should be invalid and punishable.
reply