The title is missing a

number

The number is 9

9% not accurate answers, for Gemini 3. (I think that's a lot!)

of words

One metric of "user friendliness" for websites (but also apps) is how much of the screen serves the user, and how much is adversarial.

For example, if the google results page is 1/4 ads and 3/4 genuine results, the score is 3/4.

This pages was fully covered in 3 layers of popups. So there were 3 screens of ads for 1 screen of content (well 3/4 of a screen, there was an ad at the top). So I had to figure out how to extend my computation to handle this case.

I think the score here is 0.75/4.25, or an 18% score.

That’s a new record!

That menu at the top is also obnoxious. Why does it need to be visible at all times?

The description says it's private, but the legalese it makes you agree to makes no promise. Rather, the opposite:

> We collect information about your activity in our services

Source: https://policies.google.com/privacy#infocollect

The app is open source[0], although given Apple's stance on sideloading it's hard to confirm if you're using the open version.

[0] https://github.com/google-ai-edge/gallery

Two (very quick) minutes on their GitHub repo and it's pretty obvious that they're using firebase-analytics and at the very least seem to be sending URLs[1] and infos such as the model you download or the capacities[2] you use.

[1] https://github.com/google-ai-edge/gallery/blob/main/Android/...

[2] https://github.com/google-ai-edge/gallery/blob/main/Android/...

That’s not the same app as posted which is for iOS.

You're right, they reference IOS in the README.md and link to the GitHub repo from the Apple Store page yet don't include the IOS source, sneaky.

That is the Android repo, where is the iOS repo?

I was about to ask if anybody had looked at what it was sending home. I’m travelling so I’m not in a position to run this through a proxy for a couple of weeks, but also I’m travelling so this could be useful!

In case anyone else doubted this, I will save you the time to look it up. Yup, it's sadly true.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/hegseth-no-quarter-interna...

Yep. And war crime seems to have lost all meaning in the US.

But, even if you dismiss the idea of international standards, this is clearly very bad for US soldiers (and sailors, airmen, etc). I wonder if they see that.

> But, even if you dismiss the idea of international standards, this is clearly very bad for US soldiers (and sailors, airmen, etc). I wonder if they see that.

Even if you dismiss the idea of international standards, a no-quarter declaration is against _US law_, specifically subject to the penalty of death with no other lawful penalty defined: https://www.govregs.com/uscode/title18_partI_chapter118_sect....

That's on brand. I remember their phone app asking for contacts permission and just taking them all and uploading them to their server.

> The only reason a politician would come up with a complex carbon scheme like that is if they knew a tax would be unpopular with the public.

And the way the events unfolded show that indeed, a tax would be unpopular with the public.

This attacks the strawman of people living off of UBI alone and choosing not to work. But even with UBI, working affords you a lot more money and thus goods.

As the article eventually concedes, UBI is more of a safety net than a rejection of work. Work and UBI are not mutually exclusive.

Yes that's a problem too. We'd be better off with solar panels on that land.

Terrible title but good article.

> Environmental protection is a luxury good. This has been proven time and time again.

I see this lie repeated in many places. Environmental protection is much, much cheaper than the alternative.