" Anthropic refused to allow the government to use its Claude AI model for fully autonomous lethal weapons or domestic mass surveillance, resulting in Hegseth accusing the company of "arrogance and betrayal". " It's amusing to watch these AI companies pretend to be the " good guys " who adhere to strict morals, ethics and rules. :| Even IF they start out that way, Google has shown us all to well what they will likely become.

I'm fine with them "pretending" to be the good guys if it makes them do good things. Should they only do immoral, unethical things that break the rules and "be who they really are" by your logic?

This is exactly it. It has nothing to do with publishers. If users aren't clicking on web links, Google no longer gets information about which sources are high quality or preferred. Without that signal for weighting sources, their results are going to collapse into SEO spam. And as Google morphs into an AI question and answer bot, poor weighting will no longer surface to users as bad links, it'll just makes Google's AI look dumb.

How many senior staff approved investing $33 billion in the Vision Pro disaster, and how many have been sacked for their gross stupidity ?

But we got "Liquid Glass" out of it! ;)

Now that the Vision Pro is dead, everything points to their next shot in the space being an entirely AR focused device with much lower processing power. So no games, no immersive video.

AI doesn't have to be sentient to do damage. In fact, it'l probably do the most damage if people think it is smart and sentient when it is not.

Isn't the Google App Store already malicious by stealing 15% to 30% of an app's cost from your bank account or the developer's?

"New York intends to make event contract derivatives waste away under its iron curtain of state gaming laws before the courts get the chance to issue final rulings"

Yes. Yes! PLEASE DO THIS.

I would love to know the balance of training material that was fiction vs non-fiction vs questionable (ie. reddit posts). Most human storytelling is not a pure recounting of reasons and events, it is deliberately fit into a dramatic structure, and it seems like these vending machine experiments always result in AI unnecessarily ramping up the drama instead of doing the boring thing and just buying and selling soda.

I'm not sure if it was a bad question or a bad take, but saying "Apple is insulated against an AI crash" really just means that Apple's not a player in AI. And when a bubble does burst, AI isn't going away. A lot of questionable businesses will disappear but the big players (Google, Microsoft, etc.) will still be around and Apple will still be behind.

Pioneering AI companies are going to go talk to the handful of companies with data center capacity, and lock in deals that prevent using anyone else's models in those data centers. So they will still be able to lock the market down without a needing a differentiator at the model level.

It's also a reminder of one of the biggest flaws with AI today-- Its complete lack of judgement. And I don't just mean safety guardrails. It's all over everything it does.. from unnecessarily verbose writing to fixing compiler errors by doing crazy things like looking up symbols dynamically at runtime to avoid a missing interface. AI is happy to achieve a goal, with no sense of the larger picture.

Governments should protect free speech. And please, go freely post your guesses about the future! Government should also regulate businesses. And Polymarket should be regulated out of existence.

AI solves an important problem which is that experts and smart people won't necessarily say what you want them to, because they have usually formed opinions and likely have morales. Today the primary options are to bribe or fire non-compliant experts, but AI creates a new option: An "expert" that can be directly controlled, has a fixed cost and can't be prosecuted because it's ultimately just an algorithm. It's the perfect solution for when you want to do something, but human experts would be problematic.

I worked for a startup that was building a fitness app, and Apple asked our marketing team to pitch ideas for an Earth Day promotion to promote us in the App Store. Our team had a pretty unique idea that we all were excited about, but after the pitch our Apple contact stopped answering messages about the promo. Sure enough, 3 months later Apple took the exact idea and used it in a promo for one of their own products on the App Store. At the time I thought this was some weird one-off thing that happened, but it turns out it wasn't.. it's exactly how they operate. Make no mistake, OpenAI is no saint, but Apple is a ruthless mega-corporation that's been stealing ideas for years. There's no one to root for in this one.

I think I'd like Instagram without auto-play, endless scrolling and algorithmic content, but serious question: What would TikTok even be if you took those 3 features away? It sounds like TikTok shouldn't even exist.