any plans to make 1m context standard for codex/gpt 5.x subs as anthropic has with cc and opus for subs? 258k toks is sometimes a little tight, even 500k would help.
It does, I agree. That said, they've published some Apple Research docs/papers & core documentation where they outline the architecture and how it works. Personally I think their approach is fascinating.
Yep. Google doing Google things. Not everyone stays and just keeps using them though, we're actively planning to remove GCP from our primary workloads now and will cut our spend to about 1/10 of current as we keep them in the stack as a cold multi-cloud failover target only.
Excellent take. Had Apple made a dummy proof "Pass" portal for clubs, venues, etc to use to visually design and manage passes (and maybe even distribute?) when they launched this, I think it would have exploded, and the ecosystem lock in would have just been all that much deeper. But Apple doesn't really think or operate like that.
Be really interesting to see how their approach evolves over the next couple years with sea changes happening all around them in this moment.
You are correct on both accounts, as of tahoe 26.3 you can't nest a macOS guest under a macOS guest. However you can nest 2 layers deep with any combo of layer 1 guest so long as the machine is running Sequoia and is M3/M4/M5.
I live about 3 miles out of town, fortunately directly on a rail trail. I ride my e-bike in to town to get groceries weekly. I have saddlebags on the bike and I pull a kids trailer with the seat folded down and have never run out of room, or had issues with weight. Sometimes I'll even get a few bags of water softener salt. I have a fat tire ebike (aventon), it's pretty sturdy. I've got about 2k miles on the bike, I'd guess half those are from grocery runs.
I’m not a turn spotlight off guy but it is a bit of a pig in terms of apple’s approaches to system crawling and indexing and how it leaves its metadata detritus all over the disk. I can see the desire to disable it for some.
Challenge with trying to use Raycast more broadly in lieu of Spotlight for systemwide search is Raycast appears to be built on top of the spotlight indexes (mds mdworker)
I am with you in that this rhetoric is getting exhausting.
In this particular case though I don't think "evil” is a moral claim, more shorthand for cost externalizing behavior. Hammering expensive dynamic endpoints with millions of unique requests isn’t neutral automation, it's degrading a shared public resource. Call it evil, antisocial, or extractive, the outcome is the same.
This is the “answer” in plain sight and I agree. The iPhone is the beating heart of the modern Apple empire. Tim Cook has been a vocal proponent of AR since the summer of Pokemon Go. That combined with Meta getting traction with their Rayban line is almost certainly at the center of an overarching internal strategy at Apple to ensure they are positioned to maintain or even grow position as end user mobile computing form factors shift beyond the traditional smartphone. Getting the ux and app ecosystem ready visually is what ‘caused’ Liquid Glass.
Whether or not this specific author’s blog was de-indexed or de-prioritized, the issue this surfaces is real and genuine.
The real issue at hand here is that it’s difficult to impossible to discover why, or raise an effective appeal, when one runs afoul of Google, or suspects they have.
I shudder to use this word as I do think in some contexts it’s being overused, I think it’s the best word to use here though: the issue is really that Google is a Gatekeeper.
As the search engine with the largest global market share, whether or not Google has a commercial relationship with a site is irrelevant. Google has decided to let their product become a Utility. As a Utility, Google has a responsibility to provide effective tools and effective support for situations like this. Yes it will absolutely add cost for Google. It’s a cost of doing business as a Gatekeeper, as a Utility.
My second shudder in this comment - regulation is not always the answer. Maybe even it’s rarely the answer. But I do think when it comes to enterprises that have products that intentionally or unintentionally become Gatekeepers and/or Utilities, there should be a regulated mandate that they provide an acceptable level of support and access to the marketplaces they serve. The absence of that is what enables and causes this to perpetuate, and it will continue to do so until an entity with leverage over them can put them in check.
crime finds a way. any means of semi anonymous and/or non recourse value storage and exchange will suit. iTunes/play store/steam prepaid cards and accounts, money orders, western union, etc.
Agree with you it would be different, crypto is global, most of the accessible alternative methods are localized to varying degrees.
having been to VNP watching Kilauea burp lava, as well as to Iceland and watching one of the fissures burp lava near Grindavik - each experience had a lot of similarity, but also each uniquely different.
You could be dropped in either island near the active eruption areas on some roads and if you didn’t have anything other than landscape clues you’d be hard pressed to tell which one you were on. The fresh-ish lava fields (less than 100 years old) look the same, big black rocky expanses of volcanic rock with little or no vegetation. Iceland’s mosses and grass would be a tell, whereas in Hawaii when life starts to take hold it has a much more jungle look to it. But otherwise, the sulfur smells, steam vents in the active areas, etc are very similar.
I have to say the big island of Hawaii and Iceland are two of my most favorite places on the planet, alongside Alaska. All very rural, not over developed, and an immersion in a raw version of the natural world that is largely abstracted away from us where most of us live.
I feel like their analogy could have worked if they had pushed a little further into it.
The RNN and LSTM architectures (and Word2Vec, n-grams, etc) yielded language models that never got mass adoption. Like reel to reel. Then the transformer+attention hit the scene and several paths kicked off pretty close to each other. Google was working on Bert/encoder only transformer, maybe you could call that betamax. Doesn’t perfectly fit as in the case of beta it was actually the better tech.
OpenAI ran with the generative pre trained transformer and ML had its VHS? moment. Widespread adoption. Universal awareness within the populace.
Now with Titans (+miras?) are we entering the dvd era? Maybe. Learning context on the fly (memorizing at test time) is so much more efficient, it would be natural to call it a generational shift, but there is so much in the works right now with the promise of taking us further, this all might end up looking like the blip that beta vs vhs was. If current gen OpenAI type approaches somehow own the next 5-10 years then Titans, etc as Betamax starts to really fit - the shittier tech got and kept mass adoption. I don’t think that’s going to happen, but who knows.
Taking the analogy to present - who in the vhs or even earlier dvd days could imagine ubiquitous 4k+ vod? Who could have stood in a blockbuster in 2006 and knew that in less than 20 years all these stores and all these dvds would be a distant memory, completely usurped and transformed? Innovation of home video had a fraction of the capital being thrown at it that AI/ML has being thrown at it today. I would expect transformative generational shifts the likes of reel to cassette to optical to happen in fractions of the time they happened to home video. And beta/vhs type wars to begin and end in near realtime.
The mass adoption and societal transformation at the hands of AI/ML is just beginning. There is so. much. more. to. come. In 2030 we will look back at the state of AI in December 2025 and think “how quaint”, much the same as how we think of a circa 2006 busy Blockbuster.
Totally agree that the money doesn’t vanish. My point isn’t “buybacks literally destroy capital,” it’s about how that capital tends to get redeployed and by whom.
Buybacks concentrate cash in the hands of existing shareholders, which are already disproportionately wealthy and already heavily allocated to financial assets. A big chunk of that cash just gets recycled into more financial claims (index funds, private equity, secondary shares, etc), not into large, lumpy, real world capex that employs a bunch of electricians, heavy equipment operators, lineworkers, land surveyors, etc.
AI infra does that. Even if the ultimate economic owner is the same class of people, the path the money takes is different: it has to go through chip fabs, power projects, network buildouts, construction crews, land acquisition, permitting, and so on. That’s the “leakage” I was pointing at.
To be more precise: I’m not claiming “no one would ever build anything else”, I’m saying given the current incentive structure, the realistic counterfactual for a lot of this megacap tech cash is more financialization (buybacks, M&A, sitting on balance sheets) rather than “let’s go fund housing, transit tunnels, or new aircraft.”
agree the capital could be put to better use, however I believe the alternative is this capital wouldn't have otherwise been put to work in ways that allow it to leak to the populace at large. for some of the big investors in AI infrastructure, this is cash that was previously and likely would have otherwise been put toward stock buybacks. for many of the big investors pumping cash in, these are funds deploying the wealth of the mega rich, that again, otherwise would have been deployed in other ways that wouldn't leach down to the many that are yielding it via this AI infrastructure boom (datacenter materials, land acquisition, energy infrastructure, building trades, etc, etc)
To further your point - I mean honestly if this all ends up being an actual bubble that doesn’t manifest a financial return for the liquidity injectors but instead a massive loss (for the .01% who are in large part putting the cash in), did humanity actually lose?
If it pops it might end up being looked at in the lens of history as one of the largest backdoor/proxy wealth redistributions ever. The capex being spent is in large part going to fund the labor of the unwashed masses, and society is getting the individual productivity and efficiency benefits from the end result models.
I’m particularly thankful for the plethora of open source models I have access to thanks to all this.
I, individually, have realized indisputable substantial benefits from having these tools at my disposal every day. If the whole thing pops, these tools are safely in my possession and I’m better because I have them. Thanks .01%!!
(the reality is I don’t think it will pop in the classic sense, and these days it seems the .01 can never lose. either way, the $1tn can’t be labeled as a waste).
Absolutely, me as well. I think the key here is that Apple is selling a platform that is used for a multitude of purposes, often including running software from third party developers. If you’re selling a platform device in large numbers you should have the choice codified by law of either continuing software support to some degree or releasing an unlock kit for it. You should not have the option of effectively abandoning and bricking it, if that’s the route you must go the buyer should get the option of a full purchase price refund at that point in time.
sadly apple silicon and Tahoe may have delivered a knockout punch to the future of oclp. the dortania team has said apple silicon support is more or less out of the question at this point. with Tahoe ushering in the first large batch of deprecated intel machines with the t2 chip, it’s tbd if dortania will be able to ship something to get them to Tahoe. sad days and may soon mean we’re having the same convo about older Mac’s as we are about old iPhones and iPads.