this is really something. They claim (no idea if true) to have patched 4,000+
signals in 550+ C++ files in Chromium. coveryourtracks.eff.org uses like what, 25 signals?
it's a very handwavey way to "explain" anything. Yes, they make money. But they have competition. And if someone runs out of tokens and switches to deepseek or just goes for a friggin hike in the woods, that does not benefit them. If they get a public image of a ripoff that burns all shit on trivial tasks, that does not do them good either. So there is a limit to this "companies make money" thing.
So the federal government industrial policy is the thing that supposedly will keep the prices on "A and O" high in the US while the rest of the world will get comparable AI competing to get cheaper and cheaper?
> why should someone pay that business to solve whatever problem it solves instead of also getting the AI to solve it?
well because presumably even in that brave new world, solving the problem with AI is still not trivial, even if it requires just one person. If a potential customer wants to solve it themselves instead of buying, they would have to find the right person, invest in his time and tokens, and end up with a custom solution they'd have to support.
this is a bit... general? there are companies with bullshit executives for sure, then there are companies who slay it.
i hate to list the details because people start picking on details, but in my mind MS under Satya made a 180 from crap to relevant. All the while i realize what kind of shit goes on inside and if you read Blind your eyes will bleed. Yet Satya took it from a pure 100% bullshit executive and made it relevant. So not all executives are equal.
isn't it an attempt to give structure to something that surely would have existed illegally otherwise? banning something doesn't automatically stop it.
"bars states party to the treaty from placing weapons of mass destruction in Earth orbit, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or otherwise stationing them in outer space"
but 1. today's sentiment is: to hell with these treaties-schmeaties, and 2. what you mentioned is not yet a weapon of _mass_ destruction, so we're all good!
well China debate aside, where are they? i've been dabbling in electrics for over a decade now, on the lower range they are still 30% more expensive than gas cars. Surely someone, anyone outside of China could have done one cheaper by now? Leaf came out 16 years ago and they still can't get it under $30k?
no idea how spotify ai specifically works (i don't use that service) but:
> fitting the track into the set as a whole. It’s not a random music discovery process
there have been plenty of attempts to analyze music and to automate track matching like the music genome (going back to '99) and while human DJ's definitely have their place (i actually listen to lots of those) it's not inconceivable that a lot of modern music could also be mixed and matched automatically with at least half-decent (to a human) results.
P.S. found the article itself pretty funny - like a nerdy, methodical complaint, just funny to read
there are plenty of amazingly lucrative businesses that do really well, like online casinos, tobacco companies, etc. that happily milk their users and don't bother with improving human condition. You can call that "successful product strategy" i guess, but to me that's still pretty repulsive. You can also call this hyperbole, but i really am very much repulsed at this: increasing addictiveness for the weak minds to extract more revenue.
yeah my teammates seem to enjoy checking in endless walls of MD texts of "documentation" generated by llms after it's done adding a feature. So even if that's an extreme and your documentation is more thoughtful, there is still a problem of:
* redundancy with the code: if code samples can be generated from the code, why bother duplicating them? what do they add? can they not be llm-generated later? and possibly kept somewhere out of the way (like, a website) so as not to clutter the codebase with redundancy
* if you do go for this duplication, then you are on the hook for ensuring it's always up-to-date otherwise it becomes worse than duplicate: misleading
So my preference is, when adding something to the repo, think very hard whether this information is redundant or not. Handcrafted docs, notes, comments that add more context like why was this built that way after a ton of deliberation - yes. Anything that is trivially derived from the code itself - no.
i don't know what i'm doing wrong but my mac has terrible time recognizing any USB-C headphones. First, it takes a while to recognize, then it never switches over by default so i often end up blasting on speakers if i forget that it's oh, USB-C headphones. Same confusion on Zoom. At the same time, Mac's 3.5mm just works, instantly.
But i realize that it might be hard to have 3.5mm on phones due to insane amount of size optimizations on these sophisticated devices we kind of take for granted by now.
yeah weird. Same goes for the "ATMs increased demand for tellers" strange idea suggested earlier in the article, which was automatically disproven right there by actually attributing the growth in tellers to deregulation. Which one is it?
that's kind of an ad hominem, but also beside the point: most bank apps (and websites) are actually absolute garbage, especially the top ones, just one example: the Citi app (on different phones) for a very long time refused to allow me to make a payment or change my password, so i had no choice but to use desktop. Somehow still, top banks' ugly websites seem to allow more functionality/fewer bugs than their mobile apps, which are very often just dumbed-down webviews or simplifications of their websites.
With so much hype it's a valid question: "is this useful/practical, or just a fun rabbit hole/productivity porn". Money is the most obvious metric, feel free to inquire the parent about other possible metrics that might be useful to others instead of asking rhetorical questions.
the obvious problem with replacing the algorithm is that people actually crave that shit, after all there have been tens of thousands of highly trained engineers making it as addictive as possible. So, no chance.