More likely 2026, when Valve releases Steam OS for desktop PCs.

By that logic, a map cannot be 2D because it will always have the width of the material it's printed on. The mere concept of 2D would be meaningless for anything but abstract mathematical objects.

However that's not how we use words and meanings in language. If you build a computer on a layer of material where the width is not relevant - because by design it's impossible to build it any thinner, for all practical purposes it's correct to call it a 2D material, and it's pedantry to point out that any physical object necessarily has at least 3 spatial dimensions.

I can, can't you?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2502.177...

... you know the rest 8-P

That may justify criticism. It does not justify harassment. "Justified anger" must be channeled through reasoned opposition, not character assassination, which is what you're supporting with your stance.

The ones created automatically from Facebook, Instagram or Meta Quest accounts, of course. Those remain totally unused.

What fucked up culture do startup tech bros live in, that they see all the technology used by Bond villains to enslave the world and think, "hey I could make that work!"??
Dudes, overreaching anti-privacy abuseable tech got a bad rep for a reason.

So what? The whole premise is that production be automated, so there wouldn't be a need that you produce anything.

I'm not a Mac user but according to the instructions given above, the combination Cmd+Tab Cmd+` Cmd+` will keep cycling between the three windows as you request (if you start with the browser having focus).

It's common knowledge that MS has some of the smartest people in the world working on systems and language design tools; I don't think people in general are disscounting that.

It's just that all that is orthogonal to the monopolistic, evil business practices that the company uses to sell those software products and dominate the market. People can equally admire the former and despise the latter.

You misunderstood the above post. There is no proof that they have the same nature as "common energy" and "common matter", but there is overwhelming observational evidence that the universe doesn't behave as the Standard Model of cosmology predicts it should given the known amount and distribution of mass in the universe. That discrepancy between what is predicted and what is observed is called "dark matter", and you can't deny that the observations exist.

That mindset is a category error; you're attributing to the automated system human qualities that it lacks.

The AI text-creation model follows the model of reflex actions: it receives stimuli, and spits out a response based on its evolved design.
If the generative model has any level of awareness at all, it's on par with that of an amoeba. If there is any human-like quality, it's in the humongous amounts of human-created training data it assimilated, not the generation process.

It's just like those petri dishes where bacteria get to solve some moderately complicated mazes, by growing towards the paths closest to the exit. There's no intelligence in the bacteria, it's the maze design what contains the information needed to both represent a problem and being able to solve it.

Precisely. That's why I think there's a niche to cover that need with robust tools that don't require delegating their work to a developer.

See, that's what I mentioned about supposedly smart guys not noticing the value of a tool because it doesn't align with the way they see things.
FYI I'm not a manager, I have a college degree in Comp-Sci, yet I appreciate how non-programmers can build data types and automations without having to get such degree themselves.

You don't realise it, but you just described why people use Excel and why it's a VERY GOOD tool for what it does.

That rigidity is needed from a corporate POV, but it hinders the actual work of good managers that use that flexibility to, well, manage their department: adapting to changing conditions and requirements by creating new models and workflows, without the need to build a full software toolchain.

These people complain because you're taking away useful and powerful tools that they rely upon for their job.

Developers usually don't understand the compromises that users face when you take away the flexibility of everyday human-managed tools and replace them with rigid "well-engineered" software, that crystallizes today's workflow and reduces the possibility to create new ones.

I wonder why there's no more people building Excel replacements that would help with that"robustness and company accountability thing"; I'm sure there's a real market niche there.