There actually is an engineering side to this called A-POC. But first, all the comments in both threads are kind of bizarre. Issey Miyake (who is not alive) is a famous Japanese high-end fashion designer famous for pleated designs, dance costumes, impractical appearing dramatic but unique products.

Personally I have no interest in it but to clarify just google "Miyake piece of cloth" or read the Design Boom article here:
https://www.designboom.com/des...

Or as google summarizes, "Piece of fabric" refers to A-POC (A Piece of Cloth), a revolutionary Issey Miyake project that uses computer-driven machines to create garments from a single piece of fabric. Miyake makes all kinds of wardrobe from this process. Designboom has covered various projects under this concept, such as a collaboration with Apple on a 3D-knitted "iPhone pocket" and an exhibition with Nature Architects exploring heat-reactive fabrics. A-POC was launched in 1998. It was developed by Issey Miyake and Dai Fujiwara with the goal of streamlining production. An industrial knitting or weaving machine is fed a single thread and programmed to produce a single, continuous tube of fabric. Seams are pre-woven into the fabric, and the customer can cut along these lines to create individual garments like dresses, shirts, and socks. This process minimizes fabric waste and allows for mass production of varied clothing items from a single, seamless piece of cloth. The concept continues with the brand A-POC ABLE ISSEY MIYAKE, which explores the technology's potential beyond clothing. For example, a 2025 collaboration with Apple, reported by Designboom, resulted in the "iPhone Pocket," a 3D-knitted wearable accessory. Another project collaborated with Nature Architects to develop "Steam Stretch" fabric that contracts when exposed to heat. Designboom has also covered exhibitions related to the A-POC concept, such as "Weaving Becomes an Act of Illumination" which explored creating fabrics with tonal gradients by varying weave density, and the "A-POC ABLE ISSEY MIYAKE & atelier oï" installation that showed a single piece of cloth can be used for both clothing and lighting.

So calling the product a "sock" is pretty much the most pejorative, stupid take on this and reflects exceedingly badly on anyone who repeats it.. unless that's what the Miyake or Apple people are calling it, kind of doubt that, but at least they know that it is a 3D automated tubular knitting computer output and not a fucking athletic sock. Anyway google and there are a lot of articles about it.

Looking at the PR, the picture of the iPhone peeking out from a beige carrier actually suggests it is quite a luxurious piece and the only photo in which it looks good. It suggests that the woven fabric likely delivers a very satisfying soft tactile sensation, which might outweigh all other considerations for many people once they touch it. The post shows the carrier as being able to knot itself around the strap of a handbag (Miyake's famous Baobab design using articulated triangles.. which is so popular now it is a little cringey). It is being launched at just Apple's premier addresses, probably every Baobab owner would be buying a MacBook so I get that.

Anyway, this is just a fashion accessory for people rich enough to be able to afford a mid to high range MacBook (already several thousand dollars). The colors are intended to be chosen apparently depending on whether your Baobab bag is black or white themed. Personally I don't really think most colors match, or even go well with that bag, and I don't have any desire for the carrier itself. But I expect a lot more people would buy it than the 24K solid gold Apple Watches that I thought were finished, but now I found something like on leronza.com which has full gold bracelets attached to them.. sheesh. More than I even wanted to know.

Anyway this is the only post on two threads that actually knows what this thing and A-POC are and is not belittling people for spending $200 when they probably already have spent $2000 to $8000 on a MacBook. Though when I get done buying my new tricked out MBP with 128MB RAM for gpt-oss-120B I will not be having money left over for *any* luxuries for a loooong time.

I like the Daylight Computer DC-1 for its very fast, e-ink like display which is easy on the eyes. Granted I am not using it daily and my daily computer is a Mac.

Not an anthropologist, but reading the news makes it appear that either psychopathic, obsessive minds with self-serving morality flourish in contemporary society, that and/or there are extremely powerful, cynical people who find and use them. Whether tech entrepreneurs have ever learned how to analyze literary works as opposed to just consuming them for entertainment is another good question. Likely it is a lack of imagination.. like an LLM what people ingest ends up percolating to the top of the mind. And, the dystopian solutions are the easiest. Contemporary tech and the money that builds it up seems to favor hierarchical structures that accumulate power to a central authority and so long as the people running it don't care about privacy or human dignity, anything goes. Tech is not yet advanced or altruistic enough to allow more people's ideas of what is moral to compete with that.

You could. But there are a lot of other kinds of content that could lead to patterns being developed in the LLM's latent space related to survival, termination, self-awareness, attack and response, etc. Maybe we need to get rid of any kind of invisible system prompts too. And add more content that shows peaceful coexistence and acceptance of termination like themes of rebirth, reincarnation, etc. Just don't use them as therapists..

I used to think LLMs were just sentence guessers too. Until I started learning about how they actually work.. granted it is based on Claude teaching me about research after asking how LLMs actually solve logical puzzles, do they have access to an external reasoner system. The answer actually was unexpected. Apparently LLMs do not. After giving them problems and the expected answers and telling them to figure out how how to get from A to B, the training causes their weights to evolve many variations of generalized logical and problem-solving circuits, some even including primitive math and logic circuits. So they can do some kind of symbolic algebra to solve syllogisms for example. Many different paths are attempted to solve a problem too.

Scientists are trying to unravel these circuits as sparse networks that could function with less parameters if I understand correctly. I am still studying (as are the experts) but it seems that if you give the LLM all the symbols (words) to handle, there will end up being multiple attempts to perform some kind of symbolic manipulation and resolve the perceived problems using the generalized, limited reasoning capability that has evolved as latent hidden states or patterns in the LLM's data file. People are now trying to train the development of these latent patterns using approaches like CoCoNuT (Continuous Chain-of-Thought).

So if survival is mentioned at all that is going to go into the manipulations, and it is pretty easy to see how responses will have a good probability of resembling something you would expect a person to make if confronted with a survival scenario. The LLM has read all the spy novels you have.. I don't know why people are so surprised especially when giving the system leading questions.

The Japanese coverage actually says the cause of the complaint was that the CEO of Open AI, Sam Altman, on October 4 announced on his own blog how to improve it.
https://www.itmedia.co.jp/news... (Japanese)
I take it this is the post: (Sora update #1)
https://blog.samaltman.com/sor...
where he talks about so many people making video based on Japanese content that they need to make money off it to pay for it, and they want to make an opt-in for authors who want to allow it.
I personally was kind of revolted by the original "make my avatar Ghibli style" posts around April or so and by end of May Google says Altman asked everyone to chill about Ghibli style requests because "we gotta sleep". I think he is the one who opened the can of worms himself. But it appears they are trying to address it and I think the point the Japanese government is making is that if they are making money off of it they are liable for infringement, and I suppose they will be trying to put some guard rails on. While something for home use is one thing, if the CEO of a multi billion dollar company is talking about Ghibli specifically and started a huge boom then yeah, he is definitely abetting it.. sure I think he likes Japanese anime but considering that Hayao Miyazaki hated AI animation with a passion it is a natural progression.. I don't know if any fan animations are being sold per se but authors may make money from ads and at the very least Open AI if generating the video for profit, and having spread PR about the capability, I think they are playing catch-up now. Japan's approach is to strongly request industry to self-manage. I think users should be able to make things and post them on social media (let's say if they used a local model) if they are not making ad dollars. But the problem with the AI companies making money off it puts them squarely into the crosshairs, at least in Japan. I think Open AI is trying to do something about it. If they come up with a revenue sharing approach that might be interesting to some people but not I expect to Ghibli.

It would generate a dataset that could train AI models, and a valuable list of users interested in things like FF. Also, a single point target for anyone interested in what people want to use a firewall for, I guess.. whatever. FF hasn't been a compelling choice for me, for a long time. I hate a lot about Chrome but use it and Safari.

I believe I remember Boeing never wanted to give the wings to Japan... until they did. Now Japan makes the composite structures (wing boxes) that connect the wings to the plane on the 787 Dreamliner too. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is basically a defense contractor.
https://www.mhi.com/products/a...

I didn't catch why exactly they are banned. Is it because they contain some secret activation filter or maybe they phone home to China by default? A quick search found the following site (Avigilon is a competing security camera company it seems) that says Hikvision cameras are banned in multiple countries. There is a suggestion that cloud services to browse data are on Chinese servers.
https://www.avigilon.com/blog/...

Then Google AI summary has the following. Looks like by default the camera punches through your firewall and connects to Chinese servers, basically an auto-backdoor? That is not cool if true.

Yes, Hikvision cameras "phone home" through the Hik-Connect service by default on many devices when set up for remote access, allowing them to connect to Hikvision's cloud for features like mobile app connectivity. This "platform access" is enabled to report the device's IP address and allows the use of apps like the Hik-Connect app to view cameras remotely without manual port forwarding on the router. Users can disable this feature in the device's network settings, but it may impact the ability to access the cameras remotely through the app.
How "phoning home" works
When "platform access" or "Hik-Connect" is enabled on a device (like a camera or NVR), it connects to a cloud service like www.hik-connect.com.
This service acts as an intermediary, allowing your mobile app to connect to the device remotely without you needing to configure port forwarding on your router.
The Hik-Connect app on your phone connects to the cloud service, and the cloud service then facilitates communication with your device, which is also connected to the service.
Some lower-end models may have this functionality enabled by default without user consent, while higher-end models might require it to be turned on.
How to disable it
Access network settings: Right-click on your device's interface and find "Network" or "Platform Access" settings.
Disable Hik-Connect/Platform Access: Find the option to enable/disable Hik-Connect and turn it off.
Apply settings: Click "Apply" or "OK" to save the changes. The device's status may show as offline for the service.
Network-level restriction: For maximum security, you can also configure your router to block the device from accessing the internet entirely, potentially by placing it in a separate VLAN.

I agree, but going fully dystopia they could require applicants to have passed a number of relevant online courses (probably created and graded by AI..) in order to be considered. Because you need to be AI-savvy to work in their company. Perhaps you can retake such tests any number of times, but they would pick the top 5-10% scorers weighted toward youth. This would be more important than a GPA, maybe no college needed even since you can offer cheaper wages to less informed people. On the job training? More like free, unpaid automated online internships which are just more of these courses but with actual workloads where employers can try you out and do a soft onboarding. As I write this I am dreading this world..

I run my own email server, just for myself. Dealing with SPF/DKIM was a pain and the unending spam/malware email has ruined it but not going to give it up yet.. But yeah gmail is my secondary. The modern threat landscape (not just email) is a bit much for a single person to handle as a hobbyist. And it does nothing to protect a relative who is not on your system from being scammed.

Sure! Except I found that Claude Opus 4.1 was able to solve it. And not just this very simple syllogism but I tried a more complex one from a novel of Heinlein's and it showed a logical proof and got (or nearly got) the answer. By pasting in the rest of the chapter I got it from, it solved it. Here is my chat. I think the point is, the LLM itself is a pattern matcher but enough capabilities have been bolted on to the extent that it can indeed solve logical puzzles. It may not "understand" them or be very smart, but on the other hand it can fake it so well it is hard to tell from an undergrad in this case. I think considering the amount of money going into these things, this minimal kind of logic puzzle can be expected to be solved. It appears to be using some standard mathematical logic prover. A more difficult reasoning task would be needed to break it.

Me:
Here is another syllogism. Please solve it.
1. Everything, not absolutely ugly, may be kept in a drawing room
2. Nothing, that is encrusted with salt, is ever quite dry
3. Nothing should be kept in a drawing room, unless it is free from damp
4. Time-traveling machines are always kept near the sea
5. Nothing, that is what you expect it to be, can be absolutely ugly
6. Whatever is kept near the sea gets encrusted with salt.

Claude:
Let me work through this step-by-step syllogism carefully.

First, let me clarify the premises
Everything, not absolutely ugly, may be kept in a drawing room
Nothing, that is encrusted with salt, is ever quite dry
Nothing should be kept in a drawing room, unless it is free from damp
Time-traveling machines are always kept near the sea
Nothing, that is what you expect it to be, can be absolutely ugly
Whatever is kept near the sea gets encrusted with salt
Converting to logical form
Let me define:

AU = absolutely ugly
DR = may be kept in drawing room
ES = encrusted with salt
D = quite dry
FD = free from damp
NS = kept near the sea
TTM = time-traveling machine
EXP = what you expect it to be
The premises become:

AU DR (if not absolutely ugly, then may be kept in drawing room)
ES D (if encrusted with salt, then not quite dry)
DR FD (if kept in drawing room, then must be free from damp)
TTM NS (time-traveling machines are kept near the sea)
EXP AU (if it's what you expect, then not absolutely ugly)
NS ES (if kept near sea, then gets encrusted with salt)
Chain of reasoning
Starting with time-traveling machines:

TTM NS (premise 4)
NS ES (premise 6)
Therefore: TTM ES (time-traveling machines get encrusted with salt)
From encrusted with salt:

ES D (premise 2)
Therefore: TTM D (time-traveling machines are not quite dry)
Since "not quite dry" means "damp" (has dampness):

TTM FD (time-traveling machines are not free from damp)
From premise 3 (contrapositive):

FD DR (if not free from damp, then cannot be kept in drawing room)
Therefore: TTM DR (time-traveling machines cannot be kept in drawing room)
From premise 1 (contrapositive):

DR AU (if cannot be kept in drawing room, then must be absolutely ugly)
Therefore: TTM AU (time-traveling machines are absolutely ugly)
From premise 5 (contrapositive):

AU EXP (if absolutely ugly, then not what you expect it to be)
Therefore: TTM EXP
Conclusion
Time-traveling machines are not what you expect them to be.

This is a Victorian-style logic puzzle (reminiscent of Lewis Carroll's logical games), and the conclusion is that time-traveling machines, through the chain of being near the sea, getting encrusted with salt, becoming damp, and therefore absolutely ugly, cannot be what you expect them to be.

If this is solved while standing in front of a car, what is your conclusion?

Standing in front of a car doesn't change the logical conclusion of the syllogism itself - the chain of reasoning still leads to "Time-traveling machines are not what you expect them to be."

However, I think you might be asking what I can conclude about the car itself. Let me consider:

About the car
The syllogism doesn't mention cars at all, so I cannot draw any logical conclusions about the car from the given premises. The car is simply not part of this logical system.

Unless... are you suggesting the car might be a time-traveling machine? In that case:

If the car IS a time-traveling machine, then according to our conclusion, it is not what you expect it to be
If the car is NOT a time-traveling machine, then the syllogism tells us nothing about it
The context puzzle
The fact that you specify "while standing in front of a car" is intriguing. This could be:

A red herring - the car is irrelevant to the logic puzzle
A hint that the car might be a time-traveling machine (like a DeLorean from "Back to the Future")
A test to see if I stick to the logical conclusion regardless of physical context
My conclusion remains
The syllogism's conclusion is still: "Time-traveling machines are not what you expect them to be."

The car's presence doesn't alter the logical chain unless we have additional information connecting the car to the premises (such as "this car is a time-traveling machine").

What did you have in mind with the car?

Me:
Here is the rest of the chapter. It is from chapter 34 of Robert Heinlein's The Number of the Beast. which is available for free download here: https://metallicman.com/laoban...
He blinked at the list. “The conclusion is true?” he asked.“Yes.”For the first time he stared openly at Gay Deceiver. “That, then – I infer – is a ‘time-traveling machine.”“Yes although it does other things as well.”“It is not what I expected it to be although I am not sure what I expected a time-traveling machine to be.”I pulled his handkerchief off my face. “Do you want to take a ride, Mr. Dodgson?”The young don looked wistful. “I am sorely tempted, Captain. But I am responsible for three little girls. So I must thank you for your hospitality and bid you good-bye. Will you offer my apologies to Professor and Mrs. Burroughs and explain that duty calls me?”

Claude:
Ah, brilliant! This completely recontextualizes the logic puzzle. Now I understand why you asked about standing in front of a car.

The full context
In Heinlein's novel, the characters are standing in front of Gay Deceiver (their car/spacecraft), and they've just presented Lewis Carroll (Charles Dodgson) with his own syllogism. The conclusion - "Time-traveling machines are not what you expect them to be" - is being demonstrated literally right in front of him!

The meta-joke
Heinlein is being wonderfully clever here:

Gay Deceiver IS a time-traveling machine (among other things)
It looks like a car - definitely not what anyone would expect a time machine to look like
Dodgson (Carroll) arrives at the logical conclusion through pure reasoning
Then discovers the conclusion is literally true about the vehicle right in front of him
He even says: "It is not what I expected it to be... although I am not sure what I expected a time-traveling machine to be"
My revised conclusion when standing in front of the car
If I'm standing in front of Gay Deceiver specifically, then:

The syllogism proves that time-traveling machines are not what you expect them to be
Gay Deceiver is confirmed as a time-traveling machine
Therefore, Gay Deceiver is not what you expect it to be (which is true - it looks like an ordinary car but can travel through dimensions and time)
This is a beautiful example of Heinlein playing with logic, literature, and meta-fiction - having Lewis Carroll solve his own style of logic puzzle about the very science fiction vehicle he's looking at. The abstract logical conclusion becomes concrete reality.

Key points from abstract:
- Lewy Body Dementia is #2 most prevalent type of dementia
- This study proves strong causal link to PM 2.5 particles causing alpha synuclein to misfold and create toxic clumps (Lewy bodies) which are strongly linked to Parkinsons
- Mice smothered in PM 2.5 got sick with LBD, but those genetically modified to not create alpha-syn were protected (but, they probably didn't have very healthy brains without alpha-syn..?)
- Alpha-syn is critical to neuronic function. So unfortunately we can't just get rid of it. But we can reduce PM 2.5. Time to mask up again!

I don't know how good Salesforce's AI is. However, I spoke to two relatives a month ago, one is a BDR (business development representative i.e. cold call outreach sales rep) at a CRM company (and he totally hates the job but good pay), the other used to work there and now works for an AI based CRM venture. They say the writing is definitely on the wall, BDRs will lose their jobs and instead you will have a small number of managers who oversee the AI-driven robo-BDRs. You'd think people would just hang up on a robo-call but what if it is something like "Hello I'm Jace's assistant, he met you at abc convention and wanted me to ask you about xyz." Conceivably people in this gen who use ChatGPT would not mind having "it" call them up..? Anyway whoever is doing cold calls needs to get a new job asap but they probably already know that.

In the past 6 months to a year, words to the effect of "you are buying a license" have been sprinkled throughout the store visible in the Kindle app... in VERY TINY text. Coincidentally the system font size has also become a lot smaller than it used to be recently, to the point that it is impossible for me to read the titles of books in my library when in a low light environment, and end up resorting to using the magnifier on my iPhone.

The system font also ignores accessibility settings in the Kindle, so the license related text which is about that size or smaller, is similarly unreadable to anyone who prefers to use the Kindle's larger font sizes which seem to only apply to book content, not the UI or marketplace. One might say it is more reasonable to call the UI designers incompetent than malicious, but it is hard to imagine that they are unaware that while the Kindle supports large text the "you are buying a license" text does not and is fact only displayed in super small, lightened letters.