This threw me as all your other reviews are out of 10.

“There’s always something to look at if you open your eyes!”

I was assuming it would be something like...

"To me, to you"

"Listen very carefully, I shall say zis only once"

"Can you see what it is yet"

"I have a cunning plan"

"Can I have a P please, Bob"

"Here's one I made ealier"

I treat having a conversation with ChatGPT like having a conversation with Boris Johnson. You know a lot of the details will be made up or wrong. You just have to figure out which bits.

I was going to suggest tequilla

Lovely

Simpler times.

I suspect they’re pretty cheap already.

But also appreciate that for some, the word consume feels too capitalist and implies a potentially destructive or at least non reversible act.

Anyway, appreciate the conversation and point of view.

So I guess I personally see audience and visitor imply status, hierarchy and passivity, where consumer feels more active and equitable (although it does also feel slightly more corporate speak)

But the great thing about language is that we get to chose what terms we use based on their meaning to us

If you come from a traditional media background I can see why you might consider people audience members or visitors (passive) you dispense content to.

But I can also understand why some people think in terms of their visitors consuming content (active) and how this might be more equitable.

I guess I ask as audience feels passive (and is also a noun rather than a verb), reading isn’t technically right as they’re also watching/listening. So in that instance might consuming be the most appropriate/ accurate description.

When somebody is interacting with a web page that has both written content and audio visual content, which term do you choose to use?

Not even necessarily a subset. There are plenty of enterprise examples where the person buying the product isn't the person using it.

The reason we have different words for things is that they’re often describing subtly different things.

I always found Dark Sky to be pretty accurate. However Apple Weather seems to be wrong a lot of the time when it comes to precipitation. Had plenty of 0% chance of rain turn into downpours, so i don’t trust it now :(

Ah, perfect. Let’s stick with that then :)

Thus encouraging people with a lower chance of a jury trial success (presumably due to weaker evidence) to choose the simpler and potentially more beneficial option, while folks who are confident about their case having it tested by their peers?

It sounds like there is currently a choice. I wonder if that choice could come with some sort of trade off. i.e. If you chose to forego trial by jury, the case gets fast tracked and the sentence could be meaningfully lower?

My last visit to Japan (in March) was full of frustration at other tourists not respecting (or even taking time to understand) local manners, but instead having that attitude that “I’m coming here spending money so you should accept how I want to behave.”