The thing I find most incredible about this is that people are willing to track down and spend hundreds of dollars on a dubious piece of hardware, jump through whatever hoops they have to jump through to set it up, and maintain functionality over time - just to avoid dealing with the hassle of piecing together a decent media package/

Some of this is a pricing problem. Some of this is customer greed. But you know what else it is? It's an obvious outcome of a system that keeps fragmenting and driving insane customer experiences.

Youtube TV tried. To their credit, they really tried. But ultimately, the rights owners and distributors have made a conscious choice to put enough friction in place that some people will resort to stuff like this. And they should be OK with it. Where they jump the shark is when/if they start going after the end users of these boxes. RIAA all over again - sheer stupidity.

The atrophy is real. This is a HUGE issue. Vivienne Ming has written on and studied this quite a lot - she's worth a follow

These points of view are not in opposition. They're just using different definitions of general intelligence.

Yann and Demis correctly point out that there is no apparent path with our current approach to self-awareness, proactive intelligence, or truly novel thinking. To curiosity.

Dario and Sam correctly point out that the models are already at least as intelligent as most people, are rapidly improving, and are giving humans superpowers. But they can't and won't be able to operate truly independently - _someone_ is steering and overseeing them.

The headline doesn't make sense - there's no clash here. They're just defining things differently.

I've been a paid Nova Prime user for years, and I love it. Mostly. But I do wonder if the age of custom launchers is at an end. Effectively there's Samsung and everyone else, and as more services get integrated into the OS the launchers have more to keep up with. Migrating phones with Nova Launcher as my default, which i've done across at least 6 phones over the years, is now meaningfully more difficult than it would be if I was using native launchers. Worth it for consistency and customization, but I'm betting I'm a dying breed to think that.

Is there _anyone_ that has actually maintained a sustainable 3rd party launcher business that is feature competitive?

Without financial terms disclosed I wouldn't assume this is good for investors :/

The problem is this is inevitable. And so the question is how much you want to fight it for how long.

For your apartment hallway, as a common space, it's entirely up to the building owner (or HOA/Strata) to determine whether this would be allowed.

Still crippled. Just crippled x3 now.

Not a ridiculous question. It's actually a really smart one, and one that not enough partisan commentators are thinking through. There's a few things going on here.

1. We need to separate individuals from companies. Not all that many individuals have >$250K in a single bank account. LOTS of companies do. You don't need to be a particularly large company to need to have access to $1M+ for regular operations, e.g. payroll and supplies from vendors. Those small companies might not have particularly sophisticated finance or treasury folks on staff.

2. There are an increasing number of products that automate spreading deposits around. They're called sweep accounts/sweep networks. So that's getting more common. Mercury Bank seems to be stepping up in a big way, at least for tech startups.

3. Setting aside everything else, for anyone concerned about bank failure, the most obvious solution is to put your money into the biggest/most stable banks. So absent government intervention, everyone's going to go to Chase, Citi, etc. This would decimate smaller and regional banks. You can form your own opinion on whether or not that's a bad thing, but it's definitely a true thing. I can't wait to see published data on the inflows into the top 4 banks in the US from this last few days. To your question - the federal government _does_ want to encourage the survival of small banks, for various reasons - that seems to be policy right now.

4. Pre-FDIC, banks failed constantly and depositors lost money constantly. As I understand it, it's been 90+ years since any depositor actually lost money in a US bank failure. imho, this is a good thing. For people who are thinking that the fed's intervention on SVIB is a radical departure from the norm - it's really not. It's at worst a minor evolution of fundamental principles that have been in place for almost a century. Principles like - depositors should be protected as much as possible, and risk should be placed on the banks, not the US taxpayers. Which is exactly what's happening here.

5. One of the things that makes this feel like such a story is that the FDIC is _so bloody good_ at dealing with bank failures and protecting depositors that the notion that maybe they wouldn't be protected shocked a lot of people into some pretty extreme points of view. It caused a news cycle to a level I don't recall in my 40ish years on this planet. Even WaMu's much larger failure 15 years ago didn't cause this much consternation.

I won't even get into the narrative that this is a bailout for the rich, since you didn't put it in your question, except to say that that's such a ridiculously false claim on its face that it's annoying how much airtime it's getting.

There are - they're often referred to as sweep accounts. It's quite common - most offer between $1M and now up to $4M in FDIC insurance protection by basically acting as a financial UX layer on top of a complex system of where the money goes.

Now that said, there's a reason you mostly see these products coming from institutions that aren't technically banks - places like Wealthfront, Mercury, etc. Because a bank doing this is necessarily placing the capital in... another bank. So they can't loan it out.

I'm sure this is about to become a LOT more common, despite the FDIC having basically said that they'll step in and protect depositors in the case of a bank run on a fundamentally solvent bank.

... isn't mentioned nearly frequently enough in this discussion. Until we have a giant-ass globe-circling train for all of us elites to hide in, this pause is for the best.

FWIW, I find this to be just delightful. As a long time Android user I _love_ the idea that this finally works in both directions.

Now, of course Apple will just do what Google should have done years ago and auto translate those annoying SMS messages back into emojis - and maybe Google can do the same?? - but still, this is delightful.

Caveat that I don't know anything about maritime insurance, I would have thought prior to this article that almost all of the risk would have been insured. Which seems to also be what VW said in the article. So I'm confused about this headline.

I have to imagine that some folks are going to get in a LOT of trouble over this. I have no affiliation with the military, but surely it has to be against the rules to post photos of active operations and equipment to social media?

I know you're trolling, but I'm going to engage anyways.

"Responsible for" is the key phrase here.

There's a huge difference in responsibility between a serial liar & covid denier and a leader who has pleaded repeatedly with the population to take advantage of life-saving vaccines.

This is horrible to say and feel, but it's true - I'm just out of sympathy for the unvaccinated who catch and die from (with) COVID. Vaccines have been widely available in the US for almost a year, and most other developed countries for at least six months. This is one giant, un-funny Darwin Award playing out here, and it's a tragedy for all involved.