Same experience. I cannot consider any screen that does not have the nano texture coating. It is exceptional and a huge improvement. To the point that I actually prefer a tester Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra over Apple’s own iPhone display.
If only we had created some device that could perform deterministic calculations and then wrote software that made it easy for humans to use such calculations.
ok but humans are idiots, if only we could make some sort of Alternate Idiot, a non-human but every bit as generally stupid as humans are! This A.I would be able to do every stupid thing humans did with the device that performed deterministic calculations only many times faster!
Yes and when the AI did that all the stupid humans could accept its output without question. This would save the humans a lot of work and thought and personal responsibility for any mistakes! See also Israel’s Lavender for an exciting example of this in action.
Mac is great hardware to be sure. I have to say though, I much prefer an S25 Ultra with Samsung's version of "nanotexture" — even with iPhone 17's improved (?) anti-reflective screen.
I've been very patient with iOS 26. I tell myself - so long as its foundation is right, they'll iron out these details. But it is properly bad often and at times extremely frustrating.
Why are they paying 6.4% on processing fees? What is "movement support" and where is the travel to? Do they have to publicly disclose these disbursements anywhere? This seems sketchy at best.
‘Processing fees’ likely includes the cost of administering the CRM, creating tax receipts and reports, donor support, and all the other ‘processing’ tasks that come with running a large fundraising effort. It wouldn’t just be the credit card fees.
Wikimedia accepts Paypal, Apple Pay, Google Pay, Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Check, ACH and Money Order.
Pretty hard to argue that mainstream processors don't like them.
Processors charge higher fees to merchants that are in lines of business with high fraud and chargeback risk, has nothing to do with whether they agree with them morally.
They refuse merchants with business they don't like.
If it were the case that processors didn't like what wikipedia publishes, they would not be able to accept payment, not have high fees.
I can't imagine that wikipedia has high chargeback rates, and clearly the processors don't mind doing business with them.
The processing line item probably includes not just the fees that they have to pay to processors, but FX fees, the cost of banking, the cost of paying people to open envelopes, the cost of accounting, etc.
> I can't imagine that wikipedia has high chargeback rates, and clearly the processors don't mind doing business with them.
Its actually somewhat common for people who steal credit cards to use non profits like wikipedia to "test" them. Typically such sites have no minimum donation, have donations from all over the world so fraud detection wont think its weird you're spending money half way across the world.
No. Why would a payment processor make an exception to its risk-based rules for an organization that increases exposure to that risk? Brand recognition is a liability in this case.
We’re moving almost entirely to Codex, first because often it’s just better, and second because it’s much cheaper. It’s a bet that they’re better now, but given capacity and funding, they’ll be better later too.
The only edge Claude has is context window, which we do sometimes hit, but I’m sure that gap will close.
I don't know that it should be illegal. I think the argument would be that it's deceptive. DoorDash, for some customers, claims there is no service fee - it's "free." What they're really saying is: the service of our delivery may be free, but the overall service we will provide is hidden or obfuscated in menu items, and without doing some research at the restaurant, you'll likely not notice.
One could argue it's best for the consumer to very clearly understand how much more they're paying. If not a service fee, here is our aggregate food markup, in plain sight. Transparency, in other words. Let's not borrow any ideas from the healthcare system.
reply