word_count = Counter(w for s in sentences for w in words(s))
sentences_by_word = defaultdict(list)
for s in sentences:
for w in words(s):
sentences_by_word[w].append(s)
sentence_sort_key = lambda s: sorted(word_count[w] for w in set(words(s)))
for w, _ in word_count.most_common():
candidates = sorted(sentences_by_word[w], key=sentence_sort_key, reverse=True)[:5]
for c in candidates:
print(w, ':', c)
input()
(Add epicycles for defining what a word is, what a sentence is, ensure the candidate sentences have varying lengths, keep track of which words and sentences were already seen...)
The final step of choosing one sentence and turning it into an Anki flashcard is manual.
how do you figure they've deleted all their posts? When I click the second link I seem to find a normal profile with several posts (although it hasn't been used since 2023)
Why does anyone not financially motivated care about how many views a video gets? Use the like function if you want I guess .
It makes sense to have the view count only show views that could be useful for ad revenue ... This way you can be honest with advertiser's about roughly how many eyeballs they can expec5
If you claim your counting views while simultaneoudly andvwithout disclosure don't count views of people using an adbkocker even so you could then thagvis deceiving. If it was the case I second waht the above poster hinted at: seems like a strategy to manipulate public discourse by using influencers frustration over where it hurts them (their purse) enhanced by the haunting sensation of loosing control (since they cannot know how and if they are negatively impacted by what - which makes the desire to find the cause of effect/guilty oarty/or a scapegoat) in order to disincentivice adblockers.
If the articles assumptions are correct, and it is beyond googles engineering teams to fix that issue (which seems unreasonabke to assume) theb that would be a pretty (and petty) malign and antisocial policy to pursue. (Don't be evil once was a thing for good reason)
What you're ignoring is that this was a change to an ad blocker[0], not a change to the site.
Google did not implement a change to stop counting views. An ad blocker intentionally[1] choosing to block the long-standing API calls used for the view statistics. How would you propose Google fix this, when there is an adversarial team in control of what requests many browser may make, and are choosing to use it to break the site?
[0] Or rather, an URL block list used by many ad blockers.
[1] It was almost certainly an honest mistake originally. But when the blocklist authors were informed of the problem and chose to not roll back the change, it became intentional.
Google could improve the way they serve ads. Like, one ad per “ad session”, no 5 minute ads that are longer than the video you are trying to watch, etc.
They are trying to increase ad revenue, but by increased Nguyen ads and making it harder to skip them it ironically is causing much worse practices such as ad blocking.
Why are we not counting financial reasons? Yeah, it’s a number both creators and advertisers looking to strike a direct advertising/sponsorship deal can use as an easy point of reference, which cannot readily be modified by the creator.
But to your point, the site is borderline social media nowadays when you consider all the features.
Bragging rights for sure. Many channels are parasocial relationships, and that number matters a lot to both the creator and the viewers.
It’s also mildly informational. If I see a completely out-of-whack suggestion in my feed, but it has a billion views, suddenly I know why it’s in my feed.
There are probably other reasons. I remember there was ongoing reporting about a race between two channels on YouTube racing to have… I dunno, the first video with a billion views or something. The number of video views for Gangnam Style was something everyone was talking about.
Plus, it’s nice to have. That’s reason enough imo.
depends which camp of apple watch (or smart watch in general) users you are asking.
the camp that sees the smartwatch as an accessory to their smartphone that does fitness tracking and maybe a few other useful things to avoid pulling their phone out constantly - those people want MUCH longer battery life.
the camp that sees the smartwatch as a REPLACEMENT to their smartphone, they are perfectly fine with the current battery life.
I am closer to the first camp than the second, and I don’t understand why I would need longer battery life. The watch charges very quickly, and there is never a day when I don’t have the chance to charge at some point. I usually do it during my morning shower.
1. People use these GPS watches for Ironman triathlons, ultra running & cycling events etc. They can't and won't charge before the battery is done - and remember the battery with a daily charge will degrade significantly. If it's borderline on release, it'll be inadequate after a year.
2. Just for general convenience, having to take another special cable for every late night or overnight trip is maddening. I always have a phone anyway for any actual interactions.
I find it hard to believe many people are writing texts on their watches, it's just a nice to have gimmick feature that everyone I know has stopped using.
> and remember the battery with a daily charge will degrade significantly. If it's borderline on release, it'll be inadequate after a year.
That has not been my experience though - having used both an Apple Watch and a Pixel Watch for years on end every single day. Absolutely outside my area of expertise, but I would imagine that you can design batteries to have a much longer lifetime (no of recharge cycles) when their capacity is smaller.
That’s not how Lion charging works - degradation and lifetime (to a first approximation) depend on full charges. If you charge daily from 80% to 100% or charge every 5 days from 1% to 100%, your battery degradation and lifetime will be the same.
Most people have lived with ads their whole lives, so the slow increase over decades barely registers. Many HN readers have spent the last 15–20 years avoiding them almost entirely with ad blockers, streaming, and piracy. Coming back to ad-saturated spaces feels jarring - like stepping out of a smoke-free world and into the 1960s, where everyone’s lighting up indoors.
To manage my child’s online viewing, I remove YouTube from all of his devices and instead use Pinchflat[1] to automatically download videos from a curated list of pre‑approved channels. We periodically explore YouTube together to discover new content aligned with his interests, which I then add to the list. Pinchflat retrieves new uploads within hours and automatically deletes them after a set period. The videos are stored locally and made available through Plex, Emby, or Jellyfin for remote access. This approach eliminates ads and algorithm‑driven recommendations while giving me full control over content, though it requires some setup, ongoing management, and storage capacity.
The first thing that came to mind to me - and maybe I'm a million miles off here - but all the recent drama around visa / mastercard / etc pressuring sites like Steam to modify their terms of use... maybe Stripe is thinking they can come in and be an alternative by doing it via crypto and hoping their name brings enough trust to cause users to jump on board.
"I can testify that is downstream of too many donuts."
The above statement - specifically saying you TESTIFY - does not sound like speculation; it sounds like you are speaking as a matter of fact.
I fail to see what if anything, positive you thought would come from that post? You're in a thread where people are mostly positively remembering someone they respected and you essentially jumped in and said "yeah but the guy killed himself with his eating".... like you really think that's a good idea?
You might think you're doing some greater good - but there is a time and a place for everything - the message you're trying to send isn't going to land in this sort of environment, it's just going to piss people off and have you appear to be disrespectful.
