NevermindNoMind

joined 1 year ago

I'm not going to defend the DNC, and I know the "fight from the inside" line gets eye rolls. But look at what Trump did. He took over the Republican party. He represented what the grassroots activists and voters in Republican primaries wanted. It was ugly and gross, but that's what they wanted. And Trump transformed the Republican party in his image. Traditional Republicans became refugees, "never trumpers". The Paul Ryan's and Elizabeth Cheney's who were willing to go along, without adopting the new maga Republican line, were forced out. Now the old Reagan, country club, fiscal discipline, free trade Republican party is dead. The survivors are exciled to places like the Bulwark, like it's Taiwan and they're just waiting for the opportunity to take their party back, an opportunity that will never come because the grassroots won't let them.

I'm not saying this is a model. It happened in large part because fox news let Trump run wild because he was good for ratings, and by the time they went to quash him with Megan Kelly as hitman during a Fox News debate, it was too late, the base was with him and it was Kelly who was sacrificed as appeasement. It was overall a hostile takeover of the party based on the force of personality of one person, not a takeover based on differing policy ideas or a general vision for the party and country. I don't think we can, or should want to, replicate that. But still I think there might be something there, some nugget we can replicate, for the grassroots to force change from the inside.

It's a whole lot easier to take over a party than to build a new one.

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, I hope that's not the case but I worry about it. I think the most hopeful take is Trump isn't running again, he'll be like 86, so he's not going to give a shit what comes next. Why bother to use the power of the state to help dipshit Vance? If anything, Vance losing just reinforces how special and unique Trump was, inflates his own ego. In terms of elections, I'm more concerned with the midterms. Trump has an incentive to prevent Congress flipping.

But also remember, W. Bush also had a conservative supreme court willing to let him get away with war crimes. Fuck, he "won" in 2020 only because SCOTUS stepped in to hand him the win. W. Bush was more illegitimate than Trump. But we survived, and we got Obama after. So there's hope here too.

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago

Progressive spaces do not accommodate those supportive of genocide, even if you try to frame the genocide as "self defence". The "majority" of Jews you describe are not shut out of progressive spaces, they have chosen genocidal revenge as their policy and have thus turned their back on ideals like protecting the "the least of us". Remember, it's not just progressives who are against the genocide supporting zonists, it's basically the whole world who has rejected you. You are welcome in conservative circles only because Jewish control of Israel is a necessary condition for the Christian cultists doomsday proficiencies. They don't care about Jews, they dislike Jews generally, they just support Israel because 1) a lot like ethno states and want to replicate Israels model, and 2) Jews need to be there so Christ comes back or whatever.

Jews are more than welcome in progressive spaces, and many are there, just not the ones cheering on the mass murder and starvation of civilians. Maybe take a hard look at yourself and why your on whatever side your on.

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 41 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

The first ballot I was old enough to cast was for John Kerry in 2004. After Bush lied about WMDs and got us into a pointless war, a torture program, mass surveillance of Americans, let alone shit conservative social policies. 4 years of that, and Americans knowingly reelected him by a wider margin than his initial election. This time he won the popular vote, which he didn't do in his initial election. Any of this sound familiar?

But we survived, and we paid attention, and we organized, and by 2008 we had a (by the standards of the time) progressive candidate at the top of the ticket, offering "radical socialist" policies ideas like universal healthcare and just a general vibe of inclusiveness rather than division. The Democratic party rejected the establishment options and nominated the bold candidate, the black guy with the middle name huessain. And we worked our asses off, I was mostly working on local campaigns but did some door knocking for Obama in a swing state.

And we won. The same country that four years ago shrugged off concerns about a guy who lied to get us into a war, turned around and voted for the (comparatively) progressive black guy the right painted as an out and out socialist by a landslide.

It's not just that we defeated Trumpism in 2018, and 2020, and to some extent in 2022. Democrats turned a country that voted for a moron with little to no respect for democratic norms and the rule of law by wide margins, into a country that voted for a progressive in 2008.

We can do it again. We can organize and fight and convince the working class Americans who are so fed up with the status quo that they are so desperate for change that they voted for Trump, that real change that actually benefits working people is progressive. We can do that.

Two conditions though. First, we can't let the DNC force another moderate center right candidate on us. Second, we have to make sure elections are still a thing that happens in America come 2026 and 2028. Both are tall orders, but we can do it.

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago

I just want to nip this line of thought real quick. Policies and candidates matter, convincing voters about your positions all the time (not just during an election) matters, meeting voters where they are and having conversations matters.

Trump basically proved this.

Harris out raised Trump almost 2 to 1. Harris had an army of volunteers and the biggest ground operation in history. Trump improved his margins over 2020 anyway. Most importantly, Trump did better in states and counties where neither campaign was spending any resources, like New Jersey, or another really good example is Dade County which swung over 40 points in Trump's favor since 2016, with neither party campaigning there.

A big reason was what Biden and Democrats did, not during the election, but in the three years before the election. They passed some moderate policies and utterly failed to sell those policies to voters as things that will help the average person. The average voter if asked what Biden did for them would give you a blank stare, and that's on Biden and Democrats failing to 1) act boldly and 2) communicate their policy vision and how it helps people.

Meanwhile Republicans everyday beat on the drum of inflation and immigration and crime, whether or not those issues were real people felt like they were real. And most importantly people saw these messages, because Republicans are able to get in front of regular voters, to get into the national consciousness. Sometimes by going to spaces that aren't blatantly right wing, but right wing friendly, like Rogan, sometimes just being loud and causing controversy that trickles into other spaces. When moderate spaces ridicule the latest right wing controversy, that also gets their message in front of regular people, who may not agree outright but will at least consider it. The average voter rolled their eyes at Trump saying immigrants are eating pets, but just by seeing the outrage gave some consideration to immigration and whether it's a problem, including a cultural problem, and considered and thought about the Trump campaigns larger argument. And it cost Trump zero dollars to get a week or more of coverage about what he considers the problems with immigration just by making an outlandish claim.

Money is helpful, but it's not even close to everything. We need Democrats with real liberal policies, getting in front of voters to explain what they mean to their lives, to talk about money in politics and corporate greed and wage stagnation and the transfer of wealth from the working class to the oligarchs, to talk about what is sure to be new epic levels of government corruption and incompetence that hurts real people. And Democrats need to do that everyday, not just in the months before an election, and need to do that in spaces where people are, not just on cable news.

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago (3 children)

This is basically what Republicans did. McCain in 08, Romney in 12. The whole time conservative activists complained bitterly that they were losing elections because they were not nominating "true conservatives". The RNC was putting their thumb on the scale to nominate squishy moderates believed to be more acceptable to the general electorate. The conservative activists, meanwhile, yelled and screamed that these squishes didn't represent a clear vision of conservativism, they were just focused group tested sound bites in suits, trying to appeal to everyone and actually appealing to no one. Voters didn't have a real choice, it was the uniparty kind of thing.

Then came Trump, bold no compromise vision for what his party and the country could be. Voters were willing to give something new a try. It largely sucked, so Biden a centrist squish was elected by a close margin just to restore sanity to government. Biden did do some big things, but he didn't communicate them well over his term, voters didn't see benefit, just more centrist squish politician talk stuff. So here comes Trump again, with a bold vision and a promise to shale things up. Voters were willing to put up with all the shit again just to have a politician willing to do something to visibly change their lives. Harris meanwhile ran safely to the centered, studiously avoided differentiating herself from Biden or staking out anything resembling a bold vision. Squish. No change, more of the same.

Dems need to stand for something, we need a vision we can offer to voters.

Probably more than that, Dems need a backbone to actually fight, and fight hard and dirty when needed. Voters are tired of gridlock and nothing changing. They elected the strongman because they figure he won't get bogged down in political bullshit, he'll just get shit done, even if it means breaking rules. It's ok to break some rules if your doing it to help me, say the voters. Not to say that Dems should go all authoritarian, but they should be able to convey that they are going to do everything they can to help people, they'll throw a few elbows of necessary, they'll get bloodied and bruised and do what it takes to help people.

No more "but Republicans blocked us" excuses. The Dem president should personally go to the house chamber and occupy it until a vote is taken. Dems leaders should round up union memebers and storm the board rooms of corporations funding Republicans blocking economic policies. Dems should be visibly fighting for people. No more moderate squishes.

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (3 children)

They wouldn't even say "working class", they would always say "middle-class"

NYT The Runup podcast had an episode following people door knocking for Harris in Philly projects. This was specifically one person's objection to Harris "She's always talking about the middle class, but what about me and my neighbors? We're broke".

Dems need to be the party of Bernie and AOC, activists on behalf of the working class, promoting policies of economic justice. Dems need to be the tough as nails union folk of the early labor movement, fighting bloody fights for workers rights against corporations and robber barrons. That's why people voted for Trump, they want economic change and politicians actually willing to fight for it, as wrong as they are to put that energy into Trump. Right now Dems are the party of the elites, the corporations, Hollywood, the people with "In this house we believe..." signs in front of their upper middle class suburban homes - the party of economic establishment, of incremental change that at best makes a minor impact on people's real well being. Dems are the party more concerned with using non offensive language than addressing pay inequality between workers and executives.

Dems dropped the mental of the working class fighter. Trump picked it up, but is welding it as a weapon for his own destructive aims. Until Dems take that back, with a legitimate economic agenda, with legitimate plans to help the working class, and with authentic candidates who can clearly convey to voters "I'm tough as hell, and with your help I'm going to take on those bastards" , until then we're fucked.

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (8 children)

The "Run Up" podcast had an episode following the Working Families Party while they were out knocking on doors for Harris in a poor projects type neighborhood. The first lady they talk to is hesitant to vote for Harris because she's a prosecutor who jailed black men for weed. While they are talking and the canvasser is trying to convince her, her neighbor jumps in and he says something to the effect of "Harris is a woman and world leaders won't respect her and get us in a lot of trouble".

Is sexism/racism the reason Harris lost? No, I personally at this point think it has more to do with the Democratic party's inability to offer solutions for working families - Dems are the center right party representing corporate interests and the elite while paying lip service to actual regular people, MAGA is viewed as the party of the common man, as bullshit as that is it's what voters feel. I personally think the only way forward is an actual progressive platform which addresses fundamental economic unfairness in the system, and candidates who can connect to and explain that platform to regular folk of all races and demographics.

But you can't deny that sexism/racism didn't play a significant role in the loss.

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 53 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Very real. We know that we have cancer, the question is whether it's in remission and we've got a chance to finally rid our body of it, or has it spread and metastisized to the point that it's terminal. Can't wait to find out! I'm sure I'm going to have a very productive day at work with this hanging over my head!

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Maybe it feels that way to you because the usual MAGA mouthpieces haven't denounced Trump, but reality on the ground is different.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/28/trump-rally-puerto-rico-pennsylvania-fallout-00185935

“This was just like a gift from the gods,” said Victor Martinez, an Allentown resident who owns the Spanish language radio station La Mega, noting some Puerto Rican voters in the area have been on the fence about voting at all.

“If we weren’t engaged before, we’re all paying attention now,” Martinez said. He added the morning radio show he hosts was chock-full of callers Monday sounding off on the Trump rally comments, including a Puerto Rican Trump supporter who is now telling people not to vote for the former president.

Pennsylvania has about 500k people of Puerto Rican descent. In 2020, Biden won Penn by about .2 percent, around 100k votes out of about 7 million total cast.

With races this close, every vote matters. Trump just took a giant dump on a huge very prideful voting block that Harris was underperforming with, a week before the election. That's why the Trump campaign, famous for always doubling down, took the notable rare step of rushing out a statement after the rally trying to distance Trump from the racist remarks. But Trump hasn't actually denounced the insults and Vance went with the "can't people take a joke" defence, so Puerto Ricans are just getting more pissed.

This shithead right wing comedian might have delivered this elections Comey "But Her Emails" letter. Single handedly tanking his god kings reelection for the lolz. Fucking ironic.

Edit to add more evidence for the skeptics:

There are signs the uproar is breaking through more generally. As Nate Silver observed yesterday , Google searches for Trump spiked to the highest point since the second assassination attempt. (And it definitely wasn’t a good sign that yesterday, more people were Googling Tony Hinchcliffe than TAYLOR SWIFT.)

On the island itself, both the Catholic archbishop and the head of the Puerto Rico Republican Party yesterday called on Trump to apologize. “It is not sufficient for your campaign to apologize,” Archbishop ROBERTO GONZALEZ wrote in a letter to Trump. “It is important that you, personally, apologize for these comments.”

From this mornings Politico Playbook, which links out to other sources.

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

Biden Admin: Israel, you must improve the humanitarian conditions in Gaza in 30 days, or else...

Israel: Designates the main aid organization, a UN organization no less, as a terrorist organization and bans their activities, violating international law in the process.

Biden Admin: ...sigh...the US commitment to Israels security is ironclad...

[–] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 56 points 2 weeks ago (10 children)

It's more like the Colbert Report back in the day, an exaggerated right winger who is so obviously wrong it's funny.

 
 

I was laughing too hard from that to listen to the rest of the story, so I have no idea what's happening in Guatemala.

 

In messages circulated on Friday, State Department staff wrote that high-level officials do not want press materials to include three specific phrases: “de-escalation/ceasefire,” “end to violence/bloodshed” and “restoring calm.”

The revelation provides a stunning signal about the Biden administration’s reluctance to push for Israeli restraint as the close U.S. partner expands the offensive it launched after Hamas ― which rules Gaza ― attacked Israeli communities on Oct. 7.

The emails were sent hours after Israel told more than 1.1 million residents of northern Gaza that they should leave their homes and shelters ahead of an expected ground invasion of the region. On Thursday, the United Nations said Israel had given Gazans a 24-hour deadline to move to the south of the strip, adding it would be “impossible for such a movement to take place without devastating humanitarian consequences.”

Asked about Israel’s evacuation order on Friday, U.S. National Security Council spokesman John Kirby declined to reject or endorse it, calling it “a tall order.”

“We’re going to be careful not to get into armchair quarterbacking the tactics on the ground by the [Israel Defense Forces],” he added. “What I can tell you is we understand what they’re trying to do. They’re trying to move civilians out of harm’s way and giving them fair warning.”

IMO - The Biden Administration is tacitly endorsing what seems to me to be a coming genocide, and it's kind of freaking me out. I don't know if this is about domestic politics or if the Biden administration is actually low key cheering the slaughter on. Hamas is evil and should be destroyed, no argument here. But in the same way Hamas doesn't believe Israel should exist, a good chunk of Isreal, particularly their current far right government, feels the same way about Palestinians, all of them. It seems Israel is not going to let a good crisis go to waste. Israeli military leaders have been using dehumanizing language, which is a tell tale sign of a coming genocide, they have suspended rules of engagement, my non expert opinion is the current blockade of food, water, and electricity, while inhumane on its face, is also in part to limit the ability of the world to learn about the war crimes about to be committed. The 24 hour order to move out of northern Gaza is impossible, Israel knows that, the Biden administration knows that, it's clearly an effort to give Israel political cover for the mass amounts of civilians about to be slaughtered - if they stayed, they were part of or supportive of Hamas and so were legitimate targets, and even if not we gave them a warning to move and they failed to do so, so not our fault. I'd except this from a government who before all of this happened openly believed apartied was the ideal solution to the Palestinian conflict. I'm legitimately surprised the Biden administration is straight up cool with this going down, to the point that "end the violence/bloodshed" is by written policy a verboten phrase. It seems like some sick shit is about to go down, and the Biden Administrations hands are going to be dirty.

Joe Biden is worried about turning out the youth vote for he's relection. He's decided to be a passive accomplice to genocide. It's a bold strategy Cotton let's see how it plays out.

 

Plan is to reinvent the smartphone with AI, in the same way the touchscreen on the iPhone reinvented the smartphone.

Particularly interesting given ChatGPTs latest move to have voice recognition and an AI voice respond. If you haven't tried it, it's kind of neat. This morning I had a conversation with ChatGPT with my phone in my pocket, all done overy Bluetooth headphones like I was on a call. It was actually a lot more natural then I expected. I wonder what it would look like if that kind of tech was front and center in a smartphone.

I've included a few snippets from the article below, but the TLDR is, big names and big money are behind brainstorming plans to make an AI first centered smartphone, a plan to reinvent the form factor. The article also points to declining smartphone sails as evidence that the public is tired of the same old slab every year, so this could be an interesting time for this to come out.

I guess it's relevant to mention whatever the fuck the Humane AI pin is: The Humane Ai Pin makes its debut on the runway at Paris Fashion Week https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/30/23897065/humane-ai-pin-coperni-paris-fashion-week

From the article: After rumors began to swirl that Apple alum Jony Ive and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman were having collaborative talks on a mysterious piece of AI hardware, it appears that the pair are indeed trying to corner the smartphone market. The two are reportedly discussing a collaboration on a new kind of smartphone device with $1 billion in backing from Masayoshi Son’s Softbank.

...according to the outlet, the duo are looking to create a device that provides a more “natural and intuitive way” to interact with AI. The nascent idea is to take a ground-up approach to redesigning the smartphone in the same way that Ive did with touchscreens so many years ago. One source told the Financial Times that the plan is to make the “iPhone of artificial intelligence.” Softbank CEO Masayoshi Son is also involved in the venture, with the financial holding group putting up a massive $1 billion toward the effort. Son has also reportedly pitched Arm, a chip designer in which SoftBank has a 90% stake, for involvement.

While it’s still not clear what the end goal of the product talks will be (or if anything will come of them at all, really), it does seem like the general public has become fatigued with the same-y rollout of a slightly better smartphone slab year after year. Tech market analysis firm Canalys revealed in a report earlier this month that smartphone sales have experienced a significant decline in North America. The report indicates that iPhone sales have fallen 22% year-over-year, with an expected decline of 12% in 2023. The numbers are pretty staggering, especially fresh off the release of the iPhone 15, and could be an indicator that people are getting fatigued of the hottest new tech gadgets.

291
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
 

Google is coming under scrutiny after people discovered transcripts of conversations with its AI chatbot are being indexed in search results.

You can replicate what others are seeing by typing ‘site:bard.google.com/share‘ into the Google Search bar.

I tried this out for myself, and as one example found a writer brainstorming story ideas and using her full name. It seems that when you hit "export/share" on Bard, while you might think only people with access to the link that's created can view the conversation, in fact Google makes the conversation public and searchable. This is far more problematic than the vague privacy threat of your prompts being used to train the models and later being spit back to some random person in a reply. This lets you read full conversations. AI in general has a privacy problem, but this is a good reason not to use Bard in particular (if it sucking wasn't enough reason for you)

 

“Based on your consent, we may collect and use your biometric information for safety, security, and identification purposes,” the privacy policy reads. It doesn’t include any details on what kind of biometric information this includes — or how X plans to collect it — but it typically involves fingerprints, iris patterns, or facial features.

X Corp. was named in a proposed class action lawsuit in July over claims that its data collection violates the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. The lawsuit alleges that X “has not adequately informed individuals” that it “collects and/or stores their biometric identifiers in every photograph containing a face” that’s uploaded to the platform.

 

The contestants in an event like the Excel World Championship are given what’s called a “case,” which could be almost anything. One case from last year’s competition required each player to figure out all the possible outcomes and associated rewards for a slot machine; another required modeling how a videogame character might navigate through an Excel-based level. A lot of cases involve chess, elections, or random-character generators of some kind. In every case, the contestants have 30 minutes to answer a series of questions worth up to 1,000 points. Most points wins.

This year, there’s a new wrinkle: it’s an elimination race. Every five minutes, the player with the fewest points will be eliminated until there’s only one Excel-er remaining. “We have already shot the game,” says Andrew Grigolyunovich, the founder and CEO of the Financial Modeling World Cup, the organization that oversees the event. It’s now being edited down for ESPN consumption, he says, and the whole match will come out on Friday as well. “It’s a really fun, exciting event.”

Last year’s competition featured some of the biggest names in Excel: Diarmuid Early, a financial and data consultant who several people I spoke to referred to as “the Michael Jordan of Excel;” Andrew Ngai, an actuary who is currently the top-ranked competitive Exceler in the world; David Brown, a University of Arizona professor who also leads a lot of the college-level Excel competitions; and more. (Spoiler alert: Ngai ended up winning.) All three feature in this year’s battle, too, along with five other spreadsheet whizzes. ... Competitive Excel has been around for years, but last year’s appearance on ESPN was something of an inflection point for the game. This year’s televised match is just one part of a longer season, leading up to the really big show: the Microsoft Excel World Championship Finals in Las Vegas this December. For Grigolyunovich and the FMWC team, the hope is to one day not just get on ESPN during the network’s day of silly sports but to be as popular and exciting as any other game you might watch. And they think spreadsheets have everything they need to get there. “What would you rather do,” Brown says, “spend 1,000 hours getting good at Call of Duty or 1,000 hours playing Excel logic games?” To him, at least, the answer’s pretty obvious.

 

The contestants in an event like the Excel World Championship are given what’s called a “case,” which could be almost anything. One case from last year’s competition required each player to figure out all the possible outcomes and associated rewards for a slot machine; another required modeling how a videogame character might navigate through an Excel-based level. A lot of cases involve chess, elections, or random-character generators of some kind. In every case, the contestants have 30 minutes to answer a series of questions worth up to 1,000 points. Most points wins.

This year, there’s a new wrinkle: it’s an elimination race. Every five minutes, the player with the fewest points will be eliminated until there’s only one Excel-er remaining. “We have already shot the game,” says Andrew Grigolyunovich, the founder and CEO of the Financial Modeling World Cup, the organization that oversees the event. It’s now being edited down for ESPN consumption, he says, and the whole match will come out on Friday as well. “It’s a really fun, exciting event.”

Last year’s competition featured some of the biggest names in Excel: Diarmuid Early, a financial and data consultant who several people I spoke to referred to as “the Michael Jordan of Excel;” Andrew Ngai, an actuary who is currently the top-ranked competitive Exceler in the world; David Brown, a University of Arizona professor who also leads a lot of the college-level Excel competitions; and more. (Spoiler alert: [the article author identies last year's winner, refer to the full article if your ok with the spoiler]) All three feature in this year’s battle, too, along with five other spreadsheet whizzes.

 

Starting August 7th, advertisers that haven’t reached certain spending thresholds will lose their official brand account verification. According to emails obtained by the WSJ, brands need to have spent at least $1,000 on ads within the prior 30 days or $6,000 in the previous 180 days to retain the gold checkmark identifying that the account belongs to a verified brand.

...

Threatening to remove verified checkmarks is a risky move given how many ‘Twitter alternative’ services like Threads and Bluesky are cropping up and how willing consumers appear to be to jump ship, with Threads rocketing to 100 million registrations in just five days. That said, it’s not like other efforts to drum up some additional cash, like increasing API pricing, have gone down especially well, either. It’s a bold strategy, Cotton — let’s see if it pays off for him.

34
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world to c/running@lemmy.world
 

I'm curious how those not involved in a formal running team or club go about training. Is there a specific app or program you use? How do you come up with and follow through on training plans?

I ran cross-country in high school. In my mid-thirties I picked running back up doing a C25K, then just kind of building endurance by increasing the distance. Eventually I found the Nike Run Club app and did it's half marathon training program, which I really enjoyed (I've actually done it three times now). Every week they give you two speed runs, two recovery runs, and a long run to do. All the runs are guided, which is nice having a voice in your ear telling you to run, stop/rest, how to change your effort, etc on speed runs.

Long term I'd like to run a marathon at least once. My other probably somewhat unrealistic goal is to run a sub 20 minute 5k, since I never could crack that barrier I'm high school. But I don't have a coach like I did back then, and Nike's programs are limited to the half and full marathon, so I'm at a bit of a loss of figuring out how to train.

Any thoughts, experiences, recommendations welcome!

 

Launching today to “a small group of users in the US,” according to a Google blog post.

The core of NotebookLM seems to actually start in Google Docs. (“We’ll be adding additional formats soon,” the blog post says.) Once you get access to the app, you’ll be able to select a bunch of docs and then use NotebookLM to ask questions about them and even create new stuff with them.

Google offers a few ideas for things you might do in NotebookLM, such as automatically summarizing a long document or turning a video outline into a script. Google’s examples, even back at I/O, seemed primarily geared toward students: you might ask for a summary of your class notes for the week or for NotebookLM to tell you everything you’ve learned about the Peloponnesian War this semester.

 

Anas Haqqani, a senior leader in the Taliban, has officially endorsed Twitter over Facebook-owned competitor Threads.

“Twitter has two important advantages over other social media platforms,” Haqqani said in an English post on Twitter. “The first privilege is the freedom of speech. The second privilege is the public nature & credibility of Twitter. Twitter doesn't have an intolerant policy like Meta. Other platforms cannot replace it.”

Twitter has fallen out of favor with many people since Elon Musk took over the company last year...The Taliban, however, seems to love it. Two Taliban officials even bought blue verification check marks after Musk started selling them in January.

Haqqani noted that the biggest draw of Twitter was this lax moderation policy...Facebook and TikTok both view the Taliban as a terrorist organization and disallow them from posting. It’s a ban that persists to this day.

view more: next ›