The meaning of the term "opt-in" is that it is off by default and has to be manually enabled. "opt-out" means it is on by default and you have to manually turn it off. "opt-in-by-default" or "opted in by default" are needlessly confusing.

True, yes. Totally agree with you on the fundamental definition of opt-in vs opt-out.

You can also have a checkbox that says "I consent to having my data used for training", which would look like "opting in", and it could be true by default.

Or you can have a checkbox that says "Leave my data out of your training set", which would look like "opting out", and which could be unchecked default.

Technically, they're both "opt-out", but I've seen enough examples (intentionally confusing and arguably "dark patterns") that I personally don't really consider "it's opt-in" to be a complete statement anymore.

Edit: I'll add that, in the comment I was replying to, it very much looked like you had to go to a settings page in order to opt-out, which I think is entirely reasonably described as having been opted-in by default. Here's what they had written:

> All you have to do is flip a single switch in the options to turn it off

And I actually think "opted-in by default" is valid and calls out cases where it looks like you consent, but that decision was made for you. Although in this case I think I've seen other comments that describe the UX differently, but my comment was more of a general comment than about this particular flow.

Well I would say that the machine should not override the human input. But if the machine makes up the plans in the first place, then why should it not be allowed to change the plans? I think that the hilarious part in modifying tests to make them work without understanding why they fail is that it probably happens due to training from humans.

It's the kind of thing you do with macros in C++.

Yeah probably, I mean I thought of it but never went as far as actually adding something.

Far more common than what exactly? Because if you look at the range of the exponent, you should still come to the conclusion that floats can represent more non-integer numbers than integer numbers.

Rebuilding from scratch also takes longer than installing a prebuilt package. So while it might be worth it for a heavily used application, in general I doubt it.

Also I think in earlier days the argument to build was so you can optimize the application for the specific capabilities of your system like the supported SIMD instruction set or similar. I think nowadays that is much less of a factor. Instead it would probably be better to do things like that on a package or distribution level (i.e. have one binary distribution package prebuilt by the distribution for different CPU capabilities).

> authentication, validation and security

Those are generally solved using SSL, no need for centralized storage.

Just that none of the parsing methods I learned are actually used commonly in most real compilers.

Applying pure computer science to real-world problems is of course its own field of study ;)

I find it exceedingly likely that they lose money on every kindle fire sold (at least during one of their regular sales), unless it causes more content sales. So the solution is of course to make it as useless as possible for anything else, otherwise they would just lose more. Same as inkjet printers.

I've had the same thought, though if true I wish they'd sell an unlocked version for more money, similar to how they did the ads on lock screen

Same here. My ISP recently did a promo to try out 1G/1G for free for a few months. I decided not to buy it after the free trial and went back to my old 500/200 line instead of paying 40% more. Yeah, it takes a minute longer downloading the latest LLM from huggingface, so what.

> I'm told similar economics are why you can't buy laptops with cellular modems in them

I don't know what you mean. My current laptop (Lenovo L13) has a cellular modem that I don't need. And I am certainly a cost conscious buyer. It's also not the first time that this happened as well.