I've been running Gitea on my homelab for a few months now. It's fantastic. It's like a snapshot of a point in time when GitHub was actually good, before it got enshittified by all of the social and AI nonsense.
I've been moving most of my projects off of GitHub and into Gitea, and will continue to do so.
> If this is indeed the "future of making movies," I dunno, I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I have no interest in watching anything made this way.
I'm still burned out on "regular" CG in movies. I'd be much more excited about a (hypothetical) return to practical effects than a push even further into computer imagery.
I recently watched John Wick 1 and I was mostly stricken by how little CGI was used in the movie.
I kept watching, noticing small bits here and there, subtle things, but there was not much CGI compared to almost any other action movie I've seen in the last several years, especially not much of any obvious full green screen sets and fly-by-wire wuxia heroism BS.
> If music be the food of love, play on;
> Give me excess of it, that, surfeiting,
> The appetite may sicken, and so die.
The point is actually to suggest sex. Keep you aroused, but not let you finish.
Imagine, if Budweiser ran a brothel and buying their beer actually got you laid. You'd get laid, forget about sex for a while, and the association between the beer and sex would not entice you to buy the product.
> Personal branches, not forks > With Grace, there's no need for forking entire repositories just to make contributions. In open-source repos, you'll just create a personal branch against the repo.
> This is what everyone does normally, except Github made forks a thing or whatever so you could clone someone elses repo and hack on it without having mainline permissions.
Yeah. I'm an open-source maintainer and the "everyone creates a branch on upstream" model is a complete non-starter for me, even if only due to the mess it would cause. This is a massive step backward from "fork and pull."
I think Honda's brand is a genuine advantage. They know how to make good cars, and people trust them as a result.
I'm in my 40s, but still only on my second car, which is an old Honda Civic. I plan to drive it until I can purchase a second- or third-gen EV Civic. (Surely Honda eventually plans to make an EV Civic?)
Feels a bit silly to ask such an anecdotal question to somebody I don't know, but is it really better than Google? If you don't consider all the privacy yadda-yadda issues. I mean more like the size of the index, how quickly it updates things, how good is it at actual searching (like finding an almost exact quote which happens to exist on only one obscure site on the internet), stuff like that. I could also mention stuff like blacklisting doorways, but honestly it's less interesting, and I totally believe that it does it better than Google.
Personally, I use DDG on the daily basis, and it's mostly ok, but very-very far from perfect. More so, at least once in several days I have to switch to Google, because it is seriously better at updating the index, and DDG often fails to find something on some obscure forum, even if I know it's there (because I was a part of discussion myself!) and try to assist it with finding it as much as I can. Also, Google is immensely better at knowing local shops and finding products.
Also, Google search, being bad as it is, it still the only thing I find usable on mobile. First off, it's faster, it is integrated nicely into Pixel UI, and it's somewhat good at all these "more than just a search" type of things, like converting a timezone for me, showing wikipedia summary, flight schedule, etc. Also, integration with Google Maps, working hours and venue locations, it is actually far more reliable than, say, Tripadvisor.
Still, I feel reluctant to vendor-locking myself into payed service unless it's actually far better than everything else and can replace DDG and Google completely.
> Also, Google is immensely better at knowing local shops and finding products.
Tangential, but this is precisely the "problem" with Google search. Whatever the internal decision-making process was, Google search at some point embraced race to the bottom incentivizing outspending others, either by paying for ads or showing ads. This race is ultimately won by content scrapers/generators slapping ads on top and businesses selling stuff.
Anecdotally, there is a pet supply store near me. It's nearly impossible to find on Google maps. If I zoom over the shopping mall this particular store does not appear, if I search for "pet store" it does not appear. Only if I do search for "petstore inc." it appears in results and map. So Google knows about the store, but actively tries to hide it, presumably because Google does not make money off it.
> I have to switch to Google, because it is seriously better at updating the index
On one hand yes, Google is in some cases really quick at updating the index with new entries. However, at the same time it is equally good at updating the index with removals making old content very hard to find.
It's not "that much" better for some definitions of "that much".
But they're working on making the best search engine for their customers, and it does have a lot of features for helping make your search better and less ad-driven.
I was trying to find the age of an obscure local lava flow. Google was useless for it. Kagi had it on the third hit. So sometimes it's brilliantly better.
But what I like the most is that their incentives are aligned with mine (because I'm paying them to be).
Google is going to maximize revenue which means making it as shitty as possible without you leaving. How many ads can I cram down their throats before they split? Kagi is also maximizing revenue, but they want to make it as great as possible so you don't leave.
Are the results worth it? It's up to you, really. Try it for free--if you don't miss it after you run out of free searches, then it's not for you.
Same here. I've found that I currently only want to use an LLM to solve relatively "dumb" problems (boilerplate generation, rubber-ducking, etc), and the locally-hosted stuff works great for that.
Also, I've found that GPT has become much less useful as it has gotten "safer." So often I'd ask "How do I do X?" only to be told "You shouldn't do X." That's a frustrating waste of time, so I cancelled by GPT-4 subscription and went fully self-hosted.
I've been moving most of my projects off of GitHub and into Gitea, and will continue to do so.