If the Netflix series is anything to go by, Spotify sends 70% of their revenue to the record companies anyway, so whether you’re paying for media or paying for streaming, the lion’s share goes to the same lions.

I’d rather have 3,000 albums (30,000 songs, 120,000 minutes -> 2000 hours) of music that I listen to anywhere from once a week to once every couple of years.

I like my collection - so I don’t mind having my collection randomly played back to me - some songs more often than others, sure, but it’s really nice to have some song you haven’t heard in months just start playing without having thought about it. I also like having the option to “turn down” the frequency with which certain songs in my collection play.

Being able to add music to my collection easily - ambiently out of life, when experienced here or there in whatever contexts - is something that’s still lacking in today’s tools. They’re still too profit focused, trying to build mega-hit monsters through brainwashing of the general public. No thanks.

saying there’s too much access to music is horseshit.

Ever since the mp3.com forum conversations back in the 90s: more access drives more consumption. More consumption drives more demand. People who get used to listening to more music, want more music to listen to.

In the before before times, teenagers didn’t buy albums, they bought singles…

stuffed everyone’s feeds with AI slop.

Before there was AI slop there was auto-tuned slop.

There’s a certain authenticity that comes from learning to actually play an instrument (including vocals) uniquely - imperfectly, rather than digitally perfect synthesis of perfectly timed notes from a composition score.

Some albums were meant to be listened to beginning to end, particularly starting around the Alan Parsons Abbey Road / Darkside era.

Some albums were meant to be listened to with a few songs removed.

Some albums should never have been published - the world would be much happier with a single and a B-side living the illusion that the artist can someday produce more of the same brilliance - rather than hearing proof that they didn’t.

When Pandora was $30 per year, I subscribed - when they started going to monthly only I dropped.

I don’t need, or want, an unlimited streaming service with instant access to all the world’s music. I do want access to probably 100,000+ songs of my choosing, and I do not want anything shoving stuff at me on heavy rotation because somebody paid it to.

There are things an LLM can show you that are undeniably correct, like: this line of code here calls a “free” on a pointer which might be NULL, and in-fact will be NULL if you follow this path through the code: …

Think of it like “NP hard problems” - there are problems where the solution is hard to find, but easy to verify once you are given it.

When an LLM is giving you those hard to find, easy to veryify observations, that’s value. It doesn’t have to be perfect, it doesn’t have to be 100% complete.

Or, you can hire a team of engineers to burn their brains for months on end to maybe find the same things, maybe not.

There’s a problem with both human attention spans, and LLMs’ context window capacity - neither are up to the task of reviewing a full code base for something like a browser and “finding all the flaws” - but, if the LLM can give you flaws that humans haven’t been able to find… you should be taking those wins - before somebody else does and puts them to different uses.

It’s a different approach, you don’t abandon best practices, but this new tool does give information that was previously more difficult / costly to access - so use it too.

Nobody, and no LLM, knows everything. The LLMs know some things: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2026/05/mozilla-says-271-vulnerabilities-found-by-mythos-have-almost-no-false-positives/

Best to take the best information available from all sources. The attackers are also doing this.

You know what helps? After you’ve coded something that works - whether “vibe coding” or the old fashioned way, review it for security issues. “Vibe code reviews” performed by the same LLM tools that do “vibe coding” can be even more effective at finding issues than traditional methods.

But, just like real people, if you don’t bother to care about security, you’ll have holes.

Yeah, that phone in my shirt pocket set to record really gets noticed… by exactly nobody.

Maybe he’s “using AI” to refer the IP address of people using AI to plan school shootings to the FBI?

Still hasn’t materialized in lack of shootings this year, when are they supposed to stop now?

And… is that the present implementation of Codeberg? Are they running ActivityPub protocol? Is the infrastructure federated?

I was wondering why Brembo of all companies would give up the disc and rotor tech…

Shops can fuck up all kinds of things, how often do hydraulic brakes fail closed?

So ELI5, my projects are hosted on Codeberg - they can be accessed through the NL’s new instance? Are they mirrored there, or is it just a redirect to the Codeberg host? or???

So, yeah, pulling the e-brake hard on the highway can be… exciting, which is generally not what you want in an emergency situation.

This was more of a case of: welp, I’m 10 miles from home and I have a choice: pull over and arrange for a tow truck, or proceed with all due caution on the safest possible routes and get it home without wasting many hours of my time and hundreds of my dollars on the tow.

Now, when the fuel line got chewed by squirrels and a gasoline spray-fountain was emerging from the wheel well… yeah, towtruck time. But bad brakes? Depends on the situation, many situations can be safely handled with the “performance level” you get from cable brakes on the rear wheels.

Oh, one tip should you ever try using the parking brake to stop while rolling: make sure you know how to release it and keep the ability to release it engaged whenever applying the brakes while moving. If you let it latch up, you’re gonna be a passenger not a driver.

Examples and Explanation of Diagonally Split Dual Hydraulic Braking Systems

Diagonally arranged (or “diagonal-split”) dual hydraulic braking systems are the standard for most front-wheel-drive (FWD) vehicles. In this setup, one hydraulic circuit controls the front-right and rear-left wheels, while the second circuit handles the front-left and rear-right wheels.

This design is a safety feature: since front brakes provide about 70-80% of a car’s stopping power, a diagonal split ensures that if one circuit fails, you still have one functional front brake and the opposite rear brake to keep the car stable and stopping straight.

Examples of Cars Using Diagonal-Split Systems

• Modern FWD Lineups: Most modern FWD cars use this by default. Specific examples include the SEAT Ibiza, Arona, Leon, and Ateca, as well as the majority of Ford’s FWD fleet.
• Classic American Cars:
  • American Motors (AMC): One of the first U.S. adopters, starting in 1967.
  • General Motors (GM): Widely used in 1980s “X-body” cars like the Chevrolet Citation, Pontiac Phoenix, Oldsmobile Omega, and Buick Skylark, as well as the J-car and A-car platforms.
• European Classics:
  • Saab: Notable in the Saab 96 (specifically the 1971 V4).
  • Classic Mini: Found on various versions produced between 1976 and 1980.
• Other Notable Models:
  • Toyota Celica: Specifically the 1976 RA23 model.
  • Audi: Used in several historical models, including the Audi 5000.

In contrast, many Rear-Wheel-Drive (RWD) vehicles use a “front/rear” (black-and-white) split, where one circuit controls the entire front axle and the other controls the rear.

The parking brake is an independent / redundant system. After the hydraulics have fully failed (which, no matter how well designed and built you think the system is, can still happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_232 ), the cable actuated brakes can still serve to get the vehicle stopped more quickly and safely than opening the door and dragging your feet on the ground.