• Beep@lemmus.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I would get down voted to the earth core if I did that.

      • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Tbh I use it for de-fluffing AI articles/job descriptions/what have you.

        I get that the technology is problematic in all kinds of ways, but if I have to use it (and can use it without giving them money) to nullify it’s negative impacts in my life, I’m probably just gonna say fuck it every time.

        • marcos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s the slop-tunnel for all communications. The added bonus of high odds of it completely changing the meaning makes everything worthwhile.

  • SuDmit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I didn’t expect google search to be this energy intensive (estimated between 0.2 g and 10 g CO2 per search request) and wanted to be smartass with question “are you spellchecking entire libraties?”. This gives average geometric around 1.5 g and 13k words… Short story or novelette?

    Though assuming 10 seconds per word to check… Somewhere in the ballpark of 40 hours nonstop google spellchecking. Feels realistic.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Well, stop doing it, use search within some dictionary (eg wiki).
    (You can set a search shortcut like “w” or just switch in your browser between different search engines as needed, wiki included.)

    (I know it’s a joke, but if we lower our support for Google it stops being such a dick bcs revenue.)

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    To be fair, I’m looking for a definition more often than spellchecking. I’ll be typing along, and I’ll pull a word out of my head that I haven’t used in ages, and I’m not sure if it’s the right word, so I search for a definition.

  • LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Tried that. Half the Internet is full of incorrect spellings, so a lot of times I do the search, I see it used that way a lot, Google doesn’t show a correction in the top, and still use the wrong spelling.

    It’s not just regional spelling either, it’s just people using it incorrectly a lot.

    Can’t use search to validate spelling anymore in unless it’s a really common word.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I’m quite satisfied with LanguageTool.

      It doesn’t have every esoteric variant of words, but adding a few to its dictionary over time brought it up to whatever vocabulary I know.

      • PainInTheAES@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yep it’s great, does well with grammar, and it has good multi language support. At least between what I’ve tried, English and Dutch

      • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Most of the time for me it’s not even that the spell checker doesn’t know the word, it’s that it can’t unmangle my typing or misspelling. Teh it knows is wrong, and obviously knows ‘the’, but doesn’t even suggest it as a correction.