Comment Good (Score 5, Insightful) 44
Hope it crashes and burns in a spectacular fashion, and serves as a warning sign to the rest of Hollywood.
Hope it crashes and burns in a spectacular fashion, and serves as a warning sign to the rest of Hollywood.
PointCast... memory unlocked. There's a name I haven't heard in like 30 years.
I agree with you that everything old is new again, often something that wasn't as successful as it could have been and companies are trying to make the idea work. VR has been in that category for almost 4 decades, and it still is.
> At some point your UI has reached peak usability and the you can only go downhill.
That point happened in 2009.
Also another case of Microsoft touting a "new" feature that other OS's have had for decades.
The Generative AI companies did their thing. It was overall very impressive, even if they massively overstated its usefulness. ChatGPT is a great early demo of this infantile, currently-almost-useless-but-very-promising tech! Now someone simply (heh) needs to get the compute requirements down two to four orders of magnitude.
If companies like OpenAI can (and want to) work on that, great! Or others can build on the work that's been done up to now. I don't think anyone will miss the current companies, though they might currently be employing people who likely have a leg up (thanks to their familiarity with the subject) on addressing the compute resources problem.
But whenever (if ever) it gets done, people are going to run it on their own machines, not your servers and jail. Lock-in has always been, and will always be, an adversarial force to be eliminated by progress. If that means OpenAI's long-term plans won't work out, well, too bad.
Needs its coating of eye-candy.
There's also the subject-verb disagreement bubble.
Can you use the hardware without any Meta services? Can you use competing hardware with Meta's services? And then beyond just services, can you fully replace the whole software stack?
Any "no"s above will make the utility dubious, such that there's little point in spending much time getting to know the product (except for RE purposes). OTOHs "yes"s will indicate that these types of wearables are starting to become viable.
remember that 10c goes toward funding a fascist regime.
I've heard of those famed supernovae that were visible with the naked eye in the middle ages, and I've always wished I could see one too in my lifetime.
I might just be lucky before I go nova myself.
Or we can just admit that Javascript is a shitty, unfixable language (read: 30-year old-tech demo spilled directly into global production) and all its infrastructure was built by neophytes trying to prove it could run with the big dogs.
Excel macros. You don't even have to email the malware to people.
I dunno. China is a "market socialist" system -- which is a contradiction in terms. If China is socialist, then for practical purposes Norway and Sweden have to be even *more* socialist because they have a comprehensive public welfare system which China lacks. And those Nordic countries are rated quite high on global measures of political and personal freedom, and very low on corruption. In general they outperform the US on most of those measures, although the US is better on measures of business deregulation.
EVs would be residential, not wholesale, pricing.
Big AI Data Centers would be wholesale pricing.
It makes no sense to claim Chinese courts have a lot of power, although it may seem that way â" itâ(TM)s supposed to seem that way. One of the foundational principles of Chinese jurisprudence is party supremacy. Every judge is supervised by a PLC â" party legal committee â" which oversees budgets, discipline and assignments in the judiciary. They consult with the judges in sensitive trials to ensure a politically acceptable outcome.
So it would be more accurate to characterize the courts as an instrument of party power rather than an independent power center.
From time to time Chinese court decisions become politically inconvenient, either through the supervisors in the PLC missing something or through changing circumstances. In those cases there is no formal process for the party to make the courts revisit the decision. Instead the normal procedure is for the inconvenient decision to quietly disappear from the legal databases, as if it never happened. When there is party supremacy, the party can simply rewrite judicial history to its current needs.
An independent judiciary seems like such a minor point; and frankly it is often an impediment to common sense. But without an independent judiciary you canâ(TM)t have rule of law, just rule by law.
Chemist who falls in acid is absorbed in work.