TheTechnician27

• “samodobrevijesti” is some random WordPress blog whose sections are: “NEWS, HEALTH, PETS, GARDEN, QUANTUM PHYSICS, AWAKENING CONSCIOUSNESS”
• The “samodobrevijesti” article is from November 2025.
• Despite this, its lone source, a EuroWeekly News article (an English newspaper published in Spain), was published 5 February 2022.

So it’s a four-month-old LLM regurgitation of a four-year-old story from a Spanish newspaper about a Swedish startup which never went through with the project.

A+ ⭐

Obviously, I wasn’t about to spend $3000 and hours of my time to find out whether this particular report was an exception

I’d wager my kidneys to a pack of gum that you didn’t even know there was a full, paywalled report behind this before you commented (the PC Gamer article you quoted never cites $3000). If you did, this line of reasoning would be an interesting way to save face had, again, a bulleted description and table of contents not been freely available, making laughably obvious what minimal critical thought went into your mischaracterization of the report.

And frankly, if you did know, that’s even wilder, because you fully assumed you knew better; you didn’t even try to qualify it. You just outright said they failed to account for it without knowing what was in the report. Which is somehow even worse.

I can’t say I’m impressed with their research, which neglects to account for graphics card prices tripling around the start of this decade and never returning to normal I read a magazine article about a small press release for and made a completely unfounded assumption about

These quarterly press releases from Jon Peddie Research mainly just go over more recent developments in high-level detail. The actual report, which yes is $3000 because it’s meant for enterprise customers, covers all of this, which you can verify by reading its description and ToC.

Such unfounded confidence that a professional report studying the cost of GPUs fails to account for some basic shit someone would tell you on Reddit is just arrogance; there’s no other word for it.

Danke. This should easily be fine for anyone who’s slightly-to-moderately interested; some of the nitty-gritty details like hyperlinks to the edit diffs are excluded from this copy–paste for those who really know their stuff and want to learn more.

Oh, fuck, this is going to be interesting to read about. Just to clarify: it seems like this wasn’t just Wikipedia but Wikimedia generally. So that’s also e.g. Wiktionary, Wikimedia Commons, Wikidata, etc.

Edit: Decided to check Reddit, and someone posted an ostensibly good summary on /r/wikipedia.

Nor batteries externally removable like used to be.

This would be a major sacrifice to form factor and would be strictly detrimental to 99.999% of users. Regarding benefits outside repairability, basically nobody in 2026 is going to think to carry around a second, fully-charged laptop battery. Regarding repairability, you might have to replace the battery once during the laptop’s lifespan, and the procedure is extremely straightforward.

With an external battery, you end up with a laptop that’s not only substantially thicker, but which – because it’s stuck with a large battery either on the back or on the bottom – likely has worse airflow.

Notably for this repair, there are seven captive Phillips-head screws (seen plenty of hexalobular etc.), you can just use your fingers to remove the base cover (seen plenty where you need/want a pry tool), removing the base cover already removes the battery’s screw(s), and most importantly, you just pinch to disconnect instead of lifting a fragile connector off the board. Swapping the replacement external battery once you have it is probably about 30 seconds; this is about five minutes – practically no difference accounting for how infrequently it’ll need to be done. There’s an exception for people with a physical disability like Parkinson’s, but if you can phone a friend, the process is straightforward enough for basically anyone else to do it on your behalf.

Edit: On a whim, I decided to look to Framework for a comparison. It’s worse there for battery replacement.

• You have to first undo five captive hexalobular screws on the bottom.
• Then you have to lift the magnetic top panel, being sure not to damage the ribbon cable while you disconnect it.
• You have to pull out the connector for the battery using a small, black flap.
• Then you unscrew three more captive hexalobular screws.

As far as I can tell, the T14 is the easiest battery replacement you’re going to find being sold today. If you’re able-bodied enough to use a screwdriver and it not being external is somehow still a serious concern for repairability, I don’t know what to tell you.

Wow, what elegant timing for AskYourUncle’s video about AC4.

However, 54 per cent of those who responded said it was important for B.C. to have aligning policies on daylight time with other jurisdictions.

There’s then a further section:

Business leaders, YVR airport concerned

I think you just saw that paragraph, came here to contradict the headline, and didn’t consider that’s not the only statistic the CBC was considering when calling it “mixed”.

I… What the fucking fuck is this website? It’s just plagiarizing verbatim an article from the International Business Times (which it screenshots but never credits??). The IBT itself is already an extremely tenuous source; that article I linked cites Wikipedia for one of its statements, and funnily enough, we try whenever we can not to return the courtesy because of what a crummy source they are.

Insane, OP; I’m impressed this even exists, let alone that you found and posted it. Now please stop.

“Please explain it to me. Not the actual thing we’re talking about, because I actually don’t care to consider why I might be wrong, but about this batshit strawman argument I created.”

Checking off all the boxes. If you want to talk to someone who’s whatever you tell them they are, then fuck off to ChatGPT, you clown.

it’s nice that you know the names of two renowned psychologists.

The painfully unearned smarm almost masks the way you have no idea how any of this works and just want to manufacture a reason to be mad at the NYT’s coverage of the Middle East – coverage that already has a million provable things to be mad at (of which that link is just a small sample). You’re trying to perform alchemy in a fucking gold mine, and it’s baffling.

It’s “quite easy to understand” because that’s how the Dunning–Kruger effect works: the less you know, the more simplistic your understanding of a system, and the easier it is to confidently make bullshit claims and pretend you know what you’re talking about.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_Naval_Base (among others)

After Iran sent so much materiel to Russia for their genocidal invasion of Ukraine, this is the one very tiny bright spot of this catastrophe.

You’ve got it reversed. Switching to Teams greatly hastened development, as the team’s newfound vitriol and frustration could be channeled toward the end user in a neverending feedback loop.

Donald Trump has the power to stop Trump, and you don’t see me kissing his ass when he shows no signs of using it.

Not going to feel even a little bad for those who participated in an illegal attack that killed over 100 children in a strike on a school alone. I sincerely hope the five seriously wounded (if they were a part of this attack and not just collateral) make it and have to suffer physically and psychologically for the rest of their lives, and in an even more ideal world, the VA wouldn’t give them shit for their troubles.

Edit: “Trump says ‘we expect casualties’ after Iran strikes but ‘in the end it’s going to be a great deal for the world’” Fucking gross.

Exactly where the arguable triple entendre comes in!

• “Can spam” as in “put spam in the garbage can”.
• “Can Spam” as in the literal canned meat product Spam that Internet spam derives its name from.
• And now the third: “can spam” as in “you’re allowed to spam because this law sucks”.

An understandable question, but this opinion article is by the editorial board; the source and the author in this case are functionally identical, so it’s entirely valid, in my opinion, to point out contradictions like this.

I don’t think you should be downvoted for what would otherwise be a reasonable, level-headed response.

Edit: by the way, @SarahValentine@lemmy.blahaj.zone, maybe a source besides a screenshot of a ChatGPT log is appropriate here.

Edit 2: In part because I think some of that is even hallucinated. E.g. point 3, the real headline is: “Trump’s Remarks on Migrants Illustrate His Obsession With Genes” Did you check any of this before you posted it here?

Don’t forget about CAN-SPAM! (which honestly, given it’s arguably a triple entendre, is hilarious)