Besides disabling copying, another annoying practice is when websites hijack the clipboard to add copyright info to copied text fragments.
I can barely understand showing a pop-up to request source attribution when copying content online.
However, actively interfering with things people copy is a big no-no to me. It creates a usability problem where there was none, and probably does little to discourage plagiarism.
These days LinkedIn is a cesspool of AI-generated feel-good “inspirational” content anyway… I don’t see anything good coming out of training models from its user data.
"I am so grateful for the opportunity to help you with a recipe for guacamole today. It is a humbling, educational experience and I am looking forward to collaborating on with you. Please be aware that I am still open to an interesting occupation in my field and I welcome any referrals."
I for one find it much, much more fair to have the queue or the lottery systems. If it can be paired with anti-scalper measures such as truly non-transferable tickets or banning resales at a profit, even better.
But of course the problem runs deeper when we consider what you and others have been saying: it’s just too convenient for artists to reap the profits of the current system and have Ticketmaster as their scapegoat.
Artists don't reap the profits of the current system -- they get the face value -- Tickmaster and the scalpers do.
My solution would be some kind of auction where people put in bids of what they're willing to pay for different seating types and allocation happens so same-type seats are either sold at their reserve price or sold out at the lowest price they'd sell out at exactly, while maximising revenue -- that would give the revenues to the artists, avoid queues and disincentive scalpers. Legislating for no resale above list price and fair fees would disincentivise TM supporting scalping. TM etc could always negotiate a cut of selling-price-above-reserve to encourage them to do the best for the artist from however the auction works.
I used to learn songs from piano tutorials like these, too, and had to do the manual work of annotating keys and chords. It’s nice to see a very real pain point being eliminated — maybe I’ll even find some new songs to learn :)
Why? There are already all kinds of web sites that do this kind of thing. Monodraw's unique selling point is that it's a native Mac app that takes advantage of the Mac UI and it's done well so the UX is top notch.
If you don't care about making the best possible app that you can, go ahead and do it in the browser. You will get something that's probably good enough and runs everywhere. But it's going to use more battery, more memory, and more bandwidth and not feel like a Mac app. Plus (IMHO) it's less fun to develop for the browser.
I believe the attention to detail that sets Monodraw apart can be transposed to the web as well — albeit diverging from MacOS conventions.
It’s possible to make great web apps, it just takes the kind of care and dedication that @milen has already proven to have. If the web interface lowers the barriers to developing a cross-platform version of Monodraw, then I think it would be silly not to consider investing in it.
I wish I had the money and the know-how to do things like that. In a world where many companies are downright hostile to user needs and preferences, we need more DIY electronics — not less.
It's never been a better time to get into DIY electronics projects. Literally every part of the process is well within a curious hacker's abilities. Microcontrollers and cheap sensors/displays started becoming commonplace around 15 years ago, and the most recent innovations are good and cheap PCB production and 3D printing your own parts/enclosures.
You might check out https://hackaday.com/blog/. They quite often feature projects from people who built the thing they wanted, instead of buying it. (Often because the thing they wanted couldn't be bought in the first place.)
In the future, the curation function of libraries will become even more important. Libraries — even bookstores —, both physical and online, will probably use as competitive advantage their capacity to separate the wheat from the chaff. There's no value to a place where AI slop is prevalent.
When done correctly, having one million tokens of context window is amazing for all sorts of tasks: understanding large codebases, summarizing books, finding information on many documents, etc.
Existing RAG solutions fill a void up to a point, but they lack the precision that large context windows offer.
I’m excited for this release and hope to see it soon on the UI as well.
Fwiw, OpenAI does have a decent active API model family of GPT-4.1 with a 1M context. But yes, the context of the GPT-5 models is terrible in comparison, and it's altogether atrocious for the GPT-5-Chat model.
The biggest issue in ChatGPT right now is a very inconsistent experience, presumably due to smaller models getting used even for paid users with complex questions.
Given that spellcheckers are mostly stable tech, I wonder why Google’s spellchecker in Gmail, or even in Chrome in “enhanced” mode, is so bad.
Even Microsoft Word, being a local app and everything, manages to work better than Google’s cloud-based offerings. That’s surely evidence that progress is far from being linear.
There have been some very specific issues I and others have noticed that lead me to believe the backend for Google’s cloud based spellchecker has changed from a traditional language model to some more generalized LLM-based system. It’s gotten distinctly more terrible a couple of times in the last few years.
It takes lots of servers to build a search engine index, and there’s nothing to indicate that this will change in the near future.