If a person wants to live long, by all means give them the means to do so. This is what is great about modern medicine and evolving medications and treatments.

However, stretching a person's life against their wish just because it is possible even if they are truly suffering is where the problem lies.

I think that statement is saying that the "superintelligent assistant" will assist the human to help the human "create, experience adventures, and become better friends.". I did not interpret the vision as wanting the AI to take away the human's experiences.

Not sure what point you're trying to make, but the tone comes off more combative than constructive. I'm an embedded software engineer, and I agree that a huge portion of programming happens in constrained, low-level environments. That doesn't mean AI tools aren't useful—it just means they have to be used differently.

In embedded development, you can't rely on "vibe coding." You need to understand and verify every line of code. But even in this domain, AI can help with things like documentation, test scaffolding, or code reviews. Ignoring those tools entirely puts you at a disadvantage compared to equally capable peers who do use them wisely.

At this point, *all* developers are using AI in some form. To me, “vibe coding” describes a specific mindset: the developer isn’t trying to understand the code the AI produces—they’re just testing whether it works. In that sense, the term isn’t unfortunate at all. It accurately captures what’s happening.

You're presenting a false choice — either crime or religion. There are plenty of secular individuals with strong moral compasses, and many admirable role models who are neither religious leaders nor criminals.

If you consider that WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted and markets itself as enabling private chats, the presence of Apple AI in the text input box is inherently a privacy risk—because any text you type could potentially be sent to Apple. WhatsApp might need to add a disclaimer: “Private chats—only if you trust (or disable) Apple AI.”

(Of course, I realize that talking about privacy and Facebook in the same paragraph is already hilarious!)

This seems like a counterproductive way to do a layoff, though. The good employees can and will find alternative jobs, leaving behind a team that is overworked and have reduced capabilities and morale. Of course on the other hand the good employees who quit were probably highly paid too, so maybe the short term savings is higher.

This. Seems to me that Google is shooting its own foot, while at the same time putting influencers into a dilemma. Given this article, I will have a hard time believing any influencers (or even articles in reputed magazines for that matter) that prefer google products over the competition, so the lazy me will simply not prefer Google products.

What the subscription gets yoy does seem to be highly limited. The article says "24/7 support via phone or chat", and "Support doesn't include on or offsite repairs or part replacements."
Clearly, no SLA for this fairly expensive amount.

Do you have citations for your very broad claims? Or is this just your opinion?

NYT licenses its content to the person reading the content in Firefox to just read it, essentially for personal use. If the content is being used for a purpose other than that, the licensing can be different.

For example this is why public libraries purchase books at a much higher price than end customers, they are purchasing it for a different use, which is lending to the public.

If a company wants to use the data for training purposes, it could require a very different license. And as already mentioned, whether "fair use" can be used to get the data will be decided by the courts.

Video by Sabine Hossenfelder supporting your statement: https://youtu.be/Zklo4Z1SqkE

Even for large enterprises, except for some specific cases, on prem does not make sense. One has to maintain a data center, with all the monitoring, high availability and redundancy management, and of course backups. All of this costs both money and time, and more importantly distracts from the core competency of the enterprise.

According to the article, it does not look like they are even claiming that times are tough. They hired 38000 in FY23, expected 18% of their workforce to leave on their own. However only 12% actually left. This rif seems to be just a correction. Despite this RIF, their workforce has still grown by 19000.

Of course, the fact that not as many as expected left on their own may indicate that the job market is not that hot.

A few specific examples do not a generalization make. Besides, quality is a matter of process control as much as of "worker attitudes". Apple has that down pat, as shown by their products that are currently made in China, not Japan.