|
Wordle 1,064 4/6
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
⬜🟩⬜🟨🟨
⬜🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,064 5/6
⬛⬛⬛🟩⬛
⬛⬛🟩🟩⬛
⬛⬛🟩🟩⬛
⬛🟩🟩🟩⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Ok, I have had my coffee, so you can all come out now!
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,064 4/6
⬛⬛⬛🟨⬛
⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩
⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Never used that word.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Can anyone think of a good reason that YouTube does not tell you which videos you've already watched and which ones you haven't seen yet?
It must be for some nefarious reason, but I can't work it out.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Seems to me that YT would have to know who you are in order to tell you whether you've accessed something they're presenting.
Wait, is this a trick question?
I'm always trying to download .pdfs from links that are flagging rough terrain in my performance graph of ethernet send/recieve and very slow speeds as well and when this kind of behavior doesn't have any stamp like time-of-day or similar they often report internet connection on the fritz and then terminate in the browser. Often after turning in reports of file size way more than that suggested to me before I clicked on the link.
Payload of bad content perhaps? A sign that the website doesn't like me and they're throttling my conversation?
WWW: it either does or it doesn't ... stop complaining about it.
[EDIT]
squonk[^]
[END EDIT]
modified yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
RedDk wrote: YT would have to know who you are
YouTube always knows who I am because my Chrome browser is usually logged into my Gmail account.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, I see. This is a programming question then.
Try logging off your GMail account, shutting down your Chrome browser, fire up Edge, go to YT, find the video you're looking for and download it to a local folder. Running a file search on that vast compendium and observing the returns should pretty much eliminate the question of whether you've viewed the presentation before.
|
|
|
|
|
It looks like AI has been generating your responses.
My question was why they don't tell me. My question was not, how can I find out.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
AENN!
Wrong answer. We were looking for the question "Ok, bigshot, how do I download YT choices to my hardrive?" 
|
|
|
|
|
It's called YouTube Algorithm. Understanding it is more difficult than understanding my wife's / manager's mind.
modified yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: It must be for some nefarious reason, but I can't work it out.
Just because it's YouTube, don't mean they can't be dumb. Between the obvious censorship, removing the thumbs down button as soon as we know which videos got disliked... they're too busy trying to control our minds to bother with actual usability.
Oh and a down vote doesn't prove me wrong. 
Jeremy Falcon
modified yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: don't mean they can't be dumb
Maybe you're right.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Interestingly, there is an extension for Firefox which returns the dislike view count. I'm not sure I trust its accuracy after finding out that the 'Windows 11 Inside story' video only has 75 downvotes, but it is available.
|
|
|
|
|
It does, doesn't it? Or at least for me it does - it shows a red bar below the video which indicates how far through it you are: A full bar indicates you watched to the end, and empty one that you haven't started it.
Admittedly, that's only when you open / refresh the page, but ...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Griff. See my response to Rhavi.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
If you have an account, it certainly does. There's a History menu option under "you" on the left on the web page. On my Roku the History option is under "library" which seems a bit odd to me.
If you don't have an account, do you delete cookies when you close your browser, regularly clean your browser history, or otherwise clean up locally stored web browsing data? Any of those might account why YouTube doesn't remember what you've seen.
"A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants"
Chuckles the clown
|
|
|
|
|
When I view the YT home tab, the images presented will have a thin red line along the bottom. If I started watching a video and then did not complete it, the red line will be an indication of how far into the video I was. If I completed the video it will be across the whole bottom of the displayed image. Don't know if it does this if you do a search though. This is on the general home tab that displays what it thinks you want to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
If your goal is so you don't sit through the same videos again, remember that as far as YouTube is concerned, the only thing that matters is that they make you watch their ads.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: Can anyone think of a good reason that YouTube does not tell you which videos you've already watched
It does. Click on the three horizontal lines (menu icon) on the top left corner to open the sidebar and select History from the sidebar menu to view the list of watched videos in reverse chrono order. You can also clear your history.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, I didn't know that.
But on the page where you actually watch a video, it shows the suggested videos on the right-hand side. And that is where I want to see whether I've watched a video or not.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm guessing the suggested videos would be limited to those you haven't already seen (i.e. those whose IDs aren't in the YouTube cookie or local storage).
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Sung to "Video killed the radio star". Just to put that in your head for the rest of the day 
With the rise of AI, it seems to me that many search results are now AI generated answers on websites following recipes designed to garner ad hits. Many with the same exact wording and same tables of contents. With some questions, it's tough to locate a real website that has factual answers. It certainly varies with the question or topic, but it feels like it is on the increase. Had some where those make up the top handful of sites.
So, will these become a battle of AI, with search engines AI removing or deprioritizing those or maybe the sites will up their own AI game to get around the SE algorithms?
Strikes me as ironic, we'll see whose AI is better than whose. And if you don't have the song in your head, here it is for you The Buggles - Video Killed The Radio Star (Official Music Video) - YouTube[^]
|
|
|
|
|
This seems to be the trend on Microsoft. It started with generic canned responses (maybe a backdoor prototype AI) that I always felt were off and general useless. Now when I am looking for technical info, it smells like Microsoft's AI. I suppose it's the next evolution of search engines.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
MikeCO10 wrote: ...many search results are now AI generated answers on websites following recipes designed to garner ad hits...
Isn't that the same recipe Google has been using for years?
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell
A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)
|
|
|
|
|
It is, but the results are often AI generated junk, maxing out the SEO rules.
For example, If I ask how do I trim a tree (I didn't check it, just an example), there can be several of the top results that are AI copies, for lack of a better word.
Maybe that points to an issue with AI; it creates its own validity based on a consensus of responses. One could easily become a bogus authority by spending very little money buying junk domain names and reposting the same content several times. I'd almost bet if I created a bunch of sites, or more so pages in my existing domains maybe, stating that asteroid QX95-217 may hit the earth in six months, the search engines AI could create credibility. Especially so if the AI "farmers" post more sites with the same information.
Sure, it was doable before AI, but it wasn't so easy and there really wasn't a way to create validity based on consensus.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
