I've found (good) review papers invaluable as an academic. They're really useful as a fast ladder to getting up to speed in a new area. Usually they have a great literature review (with the important papers to read afterward), a curated list of results important to understand, and good intuition about how to reason. It's a compactification of what I would have to otherwise gain by working in an area for years. No replacement for it, of course, but does make it easier attain.
I don't understand the appeal of an (majorly-)LLM generated review paper. A good review paper is a hard task to write well, and frankly the only good ones I've read have come from authors who are at apex of their field (and are, in particular, strong writers). The 'lossy search' of an LLM is probably an outstanding tool for _refining_ a review paper, but for fully generating it? At least not with current LLMs.
Pretty cool test, but I wonder how fast you ran them at? I was able to distinguish between full and half after increasing the speed to around ~2000 units.
Do you have any opinions on ergoKB? I've begun to notice some pain, not in my wrists, but in my upper forearms and am thinking about something to fix that.
I don't think it's that crazy. Hyprland has, for a long time, looked really lovely when configured. But most don't want to configure it, the linux ricing community is really small in proportion to even the people who want to install Linux. Omarchy is dead-simple to install, has good documentation, decent opinions[1], and has huge influence because of DHH himself. I stopped running it myself after while, in favor of configuring my own Hyprland install, but it's an easily accessible shiny new thing by someone with a big following. Seems reasonable to me that people like it.
[1]: I don't agree with all of them, e.g. the chatbot shortcuts. But they're trivial to disable and/or redirect and, indeed, the project does a good job of trying not to mess with your changes.
