I have never paid any sort of subscriptions for a games or paid for one that can't run offline on my own computer or phone. If I can't get a physical copy of a game, it has to be free or ad-supported to play. That doesn't mean I don't occasionally pay for a booster or something, or spend a few bucks for ad-free, but I sure as heck don't spend hundreds of dollars or feel any sort of loss if the game would go away.

Stop asking the nanny government to fix this. Step up and make a sacrifice yourself like a responsible adult instead of a whining baby. Your wallet is your best tool, as long as enough are willing to pay for something, companies will continue to sell it. And if the government creates rules, they will find a way around it.

On the other side, it costs money to keep those remote servers running. I don't begrudge companies for charging for it. Nor do I begrudge them to right to turn them off when they are no longer profitable. It's my choice to determine how much money I'm willing to spend for entertainment. People only rent online games and their associated purchases, they don't own them. The sooner players understand that and decide to spend accordingly the sooner the pricing structure will change. But as long as people are willing to spend hundreds of dollars to buy electrons that aren't theirs, companies will continue to offer it.

In the end, it's the consumer's choice and obligation to decide what they spend money on. Grow up and accept the consequences of your actions instead of playing the victim.

I cannot agree more with this sentiment. It feels outright insulting to asked to read LLM output in a context where it is *supposed* to be human feedback. Tell me what you would have told the LLM to say, I can take it from there. I don't need you to LLM it up, because it will bury your point in a bunch of crap.

Could it provide useful info? Maybe, but I can do that myself if so. I want *your* thought on something, however incomplete it might be.

... sadly for the Americans, the rest of the world now knows they can't count on a US based provider for this kind of thing any more.

It was uncomfortable enough relying so heavily on American software back when it couldn't be switched off remotely on the say so of an idiot. Today it's an intolerable risk.

The dream is that the world is built for human limbs and the 'easiest' answer to claim the same versatility is to also have human limbs.

Stairs, cluttered terrain, a humble curb can all cause problems for the usually better answer of wheels.

The non-humanoid robots we already make those by the ton, and are, as one would predict, much more useful than human-like anatomy in their context. They however want to cover the underserved facet, banking hard on ML to make the humanoid design more viable while they traditionally are just infeasible to program.

Of course, that has proven a challenge, since the ML needs to instrument all the inputs and outputs of a human interaction system, and feeling is a huge part of human operation that cannot be instrumented. So they set people about trying to clumsily remote operate them in hopes of gaining training data, but it's low quality control and very low volume of data.

The disconnect is the "promise" is that LLM brings expertise down to the masses. If AI is "too hard for Ford to get right", that dramatically undermines the messaging that drives the current expectations and levels of investment.

This is very much evidence that companies can't be as bullish as they might inclined to be, because whatever you may think of Ford, the typical company is probably worse.

It's less funny when you have people literally and sincerely saying this...

I have to take some solace in the fact that these are the same idiots who talk a lot and do nothing that I usually ignore who do this all the time, but management is extra entranced with them over the AI cheerleading this go around...

Maybe for starting their own businesses, but I don't think just to compensate them for having to take a job that's "beneath them". Like you indicate, if another person makes $15/hour and didn't get a handout because they never made money, it would seem awfully unfair to give someone more money because they used to make more money. Easy to argue that the person coming down should by all logic have more financial resources already than the folks working the jobs. If their lifestyle based on higher income is infeasible with available jobs, think the reasonable sentiment would be "tough". Sell that car and settle for something more modest or take a bus, the same sort of compromises the lower paid coworker has *always* had to make. I suppose if anything, some financial relief for those trying to support a college kid where scaling the lifestyle down isn't as straightforward, but broadly speaking they don't have a particular right for government to help them more than they help peers that never made a lot in the first place.

Keep in mind it's not and hasn't been a specific measure of something in particular in a while. It's a rough analogy for how a traditional process would have to make gate length to achieve the same density. So it's impossible to make a gate length that small, but by taking other measures it is supposed to be "just like getting them that small".

I think it may be evidence that Amazon has a shitty corporate culture that squeezes every penny it can out its employees.

Corruption can happen anywhere, but it's more likely to happen in totalitarian cultures where people feel like the system is rigged anyway. That's why countries like Russia and China have corruption problems. But I suspect the same feelings of me vs. the system occur in a capitalist enterprise like Amazon where employees are governed by dystopian, rigid, computerized metrics.

AI is stupid, but it can track details and at least provide a hint.

On the "make stuff that works" side, I've had the experience like yours. If someone lets it go too far, then it's a headache and it's easier to roll it back. If anything a bit painful as it's "empowered" some of the worst to make my day harder, being confidently incorrect all the time.

On the "find stuff that's broken" side, well, humans don't have the attention span and the AI techniques are catching little but critical mistakes by humans. In my codebase that has had regular security reviews for over a decade, including a few outside consulting companies, this year marked the first year that the teams had LLM at their disposal. It found two security issues that no one had noticed, one of which had been there almost essentially from the beginning. Admittedly, neither were exactly world ending (both required attacker to log in with admin privileges and the things you could do were a bit constrained), but they were real and undesirable. One of them kind of missed the point and although it mis-characterized the behavior, it put a light on an area where a human could actually think through and sort out the real issue, and how the flawed approach applied more broadly than the AI identified.

So AI as a review tool can work, it has a significant amount of false positives and misses stuff of course, but it can either directly catch or inspire human attention on a sketchy area.

The security team said that it was actually quite remarkable they only found two vulnerabilities that both required admin access, that most projects they dealt with ended up with 4-5 vulnerabilities exposed to either unprivileged users or even unauthenticated access. This is the sort of code the world is mostly built on.

Frankly, the quality of build, the stability of the operating system, and just the plain reliability and features even in the supporting tools exceed Windows. Take the Preview App. The work I can do on PDFs; signatures, annotations, OCR, right out of the box, and built so that the versions on my iPhone and iPad fully integrate, cannot be easily replicated on Windows. Apple just really has an eye for workflow, and making sure the base system and tools fit well into that.

It's not perfect, to be sure, I wouldn't want to use Pages as my full time word processor, and Apple, like Microsoft and Google, suffer designed interoperation friction, which does suck. But all in all, I'm just more efficient on a Mac, and in subtle ways I never knew were even problems until I picked a MacBook up the first time. Honestly going to Windows right now is just horrible for me, particular Windows 11, which just feels like constant chaos and out of control busy-ness.

Presumably, this is the whole point of these contracts, to hold the customers accountable for Micron making memory for them when the broader market is not necessarily looking for that particular memory.

Now I don't see how this can work out in one of the more well documented ones. OpenAI had at least a trillion dollars of these sorts of purchasing commitments, and even pretty bullish assessments don't support their ability to make that much purchase. So I do anticipate the market failing to make their minimum purchase commitments. I'm presuming there are penalties in these agreements and so they probably get money for nothing unless it gets so bad that OpenAI goes actually bankrupt.

It uses a screen as a gauge cluster, and puts the backup camera feed there.

They don't presume any speaker setup either, which would be a pretty key expectation of android auto in general.

They evidently will support a double-din mount of whatever you want, so you could add that without much issue.

Presuming reasonable access to channels to cable and mount speakers, I'm a huge fan of this facet of things.

I would like to see a couple of integration points, steering wheel controls and EV battery state/range estimates fed to the navigation like you get with other EVs and android auto, but no need to be as heavy handed as other platforms.

Unfortunately for my situation, it would lose out handily if a competitor had a midgate. I rarely need a substantial bed and usually need the seating, but it looks like it won't be easy to free up your bed if you have the seats in. Also subjecting the rear passengers to coming in by the front door.

If slate had a 4 door pickup with midgate to get longer bed, and maybe 20 inches or so longer to have that same bed even with rear seats available, I'd strongly consider it.

You do know that if the immune system got confused about virus versus cells hijacked to replicate viral material, we would have been dead pretty much the first second you got exposed to a virus? This is what a virus does. The difference is the virus produces material that will re-infect cells, while the mRNA resultant material is not self-replicating.

You also know that we had *billions* of people use mRNA vacinne and autoimmune problems weren't even vaguely a concern, and it was effective?

They say two things, one is that folks don't know how to deal with a released person:
"Their case manager may need to consult a dozen or more paper files or databases to learn whether they were convicted of a violent offense, if they require mental-health medications, if they can stay with family or need housing, and which vocational and educational programs they may have taken, among other factors."

The other:
"Not only would a more-efficient system help released inmates get the support they need, it could highlight who is likely to offend again after release."

So sounds like making more informed parole decisions?