Yeah...

No, it didn't. It's probable the person doesn't even have a chicken coop.

Reminds me of how a 'service for AIs to rent-a-human to do tasks that needed physical presence' induced someone to ask LLM what it would do with it, and the LLM proceeded to talk about how it would be nice for a human to "fix stuff around my house", the LLM doesn't have a house, but it is the sort of thing a human would say about such a service.

The most important resource is that everyone believes OpenAI is 'the' thing. People still seem to be using 'ChatGPT' as the default thing to say even though arguably the least useful of the major LLMs now.

Of course, the bad press of swooping in to take a relative pittance of government money after it was made very public that Anthropic was on the outs for trying to take something that looked like a principle stand is more damaging than anything.

Yep, however good or not as good the LLMs are at facts, they are very good at 'narrative', and seems like there's a critical mass that deems narrative sufficient, a marketing person's wet dream...

Musk was already out by then...

Would have been nice if the ousting of Altman in 2023 had stuck...

Inclined to think they want to step back and go back to be more strictly an 'arms dealer' and step away from specific players. Frankly a small number of people controlling most of the purchasing is actually bad news for nVidia, as those folks have way too much leverage. If one day OpenAI announces a pivot to another hardware platform, nVidia would be hosed, and historically these big tech companies tend to at least have the hubris to think they should make bespoke hardware for themselves instead of being plebes that buy anything vaguely off the shelf.

nVidia is trying to push hard to get *everyone* wanting to buy their stuff, and hopefully even higher margin than big purchasers would abide. Having big AI companies just stuff them into off-premise datacenters just denies nVidia a great deal of control over their fortunes.

Seems interesting, guess we will know if nVidia suddenly goes crazy throwing cash at xAI instead...

Note that the original deal didn't seem to confer nVidia equity, so the IPO wouldn't have mattered in that one, which is why so many people blasted it as absurd.

Their new deal that replaces the old is actually less money and nVidia gets equity for their trouble, so it's a much more understandable move.

But it should be seen as a sign that nVidia went from $100B to them for not much in return, to $30B for equity to "we're done now" in pretty short timeframe.

Once upon a time, this was a very strong argument, the architecture of the hardware and software of personal computers were just so different from each other.

Now the processor and GPU architectures of the consoles are identical to what can be found with PC.

On the software side, there are differences mostly due to Sony's self-inflicted decision to continue to have a proprietary graphics API, though if you use Unreal or Unity, then you don't have that much to worry about.

On the UI side, supporting keyboard+mouse players in addition to controller players and the associated 'button' indicators having to change based on which controller scheme and model are in use would add some too.

So the fixed-hardware facet of the platform doesn't matter specifically so much as people aren't doing the same super picky tricks they were doing decades ago that demanded super precision. The choice to have distinct APIs and to have many of their games similarly make in-house game engines do make PS5+PC more complicated versus Sony embracing Vulkan or their game developers using a cross-platform game engine from the onset.

I said that the OS personality would adapt, not that the docked phone would act just like a 'giant phone'.

E.g. if you take an android phone with desktop capability and you 'dock' it, you get desktop style window management, mouse cursor, etc. Except their window manager is pretty lame, but that's not fundamental to the concept.

Look at this device, it's effectively a hard-docked iPhone already. iOS and MacOS are roughly common core with different 'desktop shells'. So in principle you have the desktop shell launch on dock, and you could run most of your applications and accept the limitations for applications that go hard on things like accelerators.

And in terms of the display, a *lot* of laptops have credible multi-touch displays anyway. Not how I'd want to use applications broadly, but it's not like phones and tablets are the only places you'd find multitouch displays.

Given they can run full MacOS on the system, it seems like a software exercise to have the phone detect and run an appropriate OS interface for the form factor.

That said, they'd need a different iPhone anyway, for the same reasons this laptop is so limited, you couldn't implement a compelling 'dock' via external connection with this hardware.

Indeed, as of 5G they stopped just saying 'faster and better', now each turn of the crank they feel like they need some 'narrative' to rationalize faster and better.

With 5G the buzzword du jour was 'Internet of Things', and accordingly 5G was going to be needed because everything would have a cellular radio, and 5G was only really needed because of that, *maybe* a whiff of AR/VR too.

6G *of course* the buzzword is AI...

Your problem is thinking of this as a technical situation, but it's business posturing instead.

Anthropic has pretty much monopolized the vibecode bros and has near exclusive credibility, with Github Copilot getting some attention thanks to Microsoft business relationships, VSCode, and Github clout, but largely only because they explicitly give access to Anthropic models, so you can use AI-augmented familiar workflows and UIs with Anthropic's models.

It also is turning out that vibecode folks are the ones first in line to throw money at the AI companies, so OpenAI's lack of credibility is a damn near fatal issue. So since Microsoft was able to weaponize Github to get some clout in the vibecode world, clearly OpenAI needs to make a whole new Github to give them a shot.

This court case hasn't gone that far, it said a wholly computer generated work is not subject to copyright, not that it disqualifies any work that contains it.

From what I'm seeing, I fully expect that a creative work that contains some AI in it will absolutely still be considered copyrightable, just that people can consider the AI generated portions of it to be public domain if it contains no elements from then in particular...

Weirder, if you took a human generated original character and had an AI generate animation frames... I suspect the derivation of the human content would still be subject to the copyright (otherwise, you could just launder copyright infringement through an LLM)

This specific case was a generation from allegedly nothing at all and entirely composed of procedural computer output with no claim of human inputs whatsoever.

True, but good luck proving someone *only* used AI in a creative work. You have only their word to go on and even if you have *obvious* LLM artifacts, they could always claim they did it on purpose, or that they added some human crafted elements to it.