No, they wouldn’t. What does “best” mean in this context, anyway?
No, they wouldn’t. What does “best” mean in this context, anyway?
Did you… read the article?
Lol, that was funny! I know I’m being pedantic. I usually make those observations just to scratch an itch. The itch was a bit stronger than usual with this one because it’s a journalistic video. That’s all.
The video has a typo. It uses “it’s” instead of “its”.
I got that one too. Either a way to test if users are paying attention or, or… I don’t know. Mistranslation? It was a bullshit option. Insulting, even.
Yeah, what kind of bullshit survey format was that? I guess that format has its uses, but the way Mozilla is using it here is awful, awful, awful. I didn’t finish it. What happened to the 1 to 5 stars, points or whatevs?
Or even trim it.
P-Peertube?
You too!
I don’t think we’re disagreeing.
I don’t think you’re disagreeing with the parent poster…
The same thing happened with a lot of awesome things you’re using right now. But I understand your impatience.
Ok! Will do.
Couldn’t an AI do the same?
And disclaimer, I’m not a fan of the current iteration of “AIs.” I’m just trying to understand why coding and testing would be an issue if done by some tool.
Hm, but isn’t usually the same developer who writes the code and the test?
Why would it be an issue if an AI does the same?
Why is this garbage in a science community?
Where’s the study? The experiments? The research?
Independence issue?
Haha yeah, I see how that could be entertaining.
But eh.
This is off-topic.
The downvoters don’t realize that science is all about finding out about stuff. The whys, the hows… you know, what “woke” people do.