hector_vasquez

I'll vote with my vote as well, and my vote will not be for candidates who equate computers with tables. Hacking isn't a human right. Go buy a different phone if you don't like Apple's phones. There are a bunch to choose from.

There have been several companies that tried to sell open mobile devices over the years, but people have shown time and time again that they don't want to buy that product. We can wish it were different all we like, but in general we aren't entitled to money-losing, unmarketable products.

I wonder the lengths smartphone vendors are going to prevent this kind of attack. I cannot imagine it is easy to completely validate hardware in such an elaborate supply chain. I shudder to think about the attack surface in something like a modern car.

Did you steal this metaphor from a written work without compensating the writers?

The main problem with this clever mad lib is that published works are published for the express purpose of being read, understood, synthesized, and used as context for knowledge. That is literally the whole reason to publish something. That is all fair use and has been for a very long time. Teachers, critics, writers, everyone who reads, use written works in pretty much exactly this way. If I buy a book about fishing I am allowed to teach what I learn to anyone I want, and even charge for it. Anthropic is choosing not to publish some of its products’ internal workings, as is their right. I find all the righteous indignation about this rather insolent.

What we hope for is mostly irrelevant. The enterprises investing vast sums in research will do everything they can to make their products competitive and marketable. Same as ever. The continued existence of this market is basically predicated on stopping distillation. In effect, commoditization of the frontier stops the frontier. We cannot have something as expensive as intelligence both ways.

Opus 5.5 is the best model I’ve ever used. It is certainly not “impossible” to use. The numbers back it up too. If you don’t like a product or the people selling it, don’t use it. The sense of entitlement in this post is remarkable. If you have principles, stand on them. You are not entitled to anything more here.

My software application uses Haiku in production more or less as a Jev. I do not use it for coding or development.

Ex-NVIDIA employee here who worked on inference software. When it comes to inference software and models, NVIDIA's strategy is advancing the state of the art in the open model realm. They are building software and services business for those markets that need to be competitive on their own merits, and quantization and precision tuning are techniques they use themselves constantly.

The allegation is that OpenAI explicitly requested that people bring and explain actual prototypes ("show and tell"), and downloading files from iCloud Drive after quitting Apple to join OpenAI. What you're describing is not even remotely on this level.

Man sets out to write article on DK Effect, comes across one skeptical study, confidently writes article refuting DK Effect.

It writes itself.

If there was ever a time to sell all your stocks and buy gold, this is it. NVIDIA to zero. This will make COVID look like a market hiccup.

Having worked at Apple and similarly giant companies, the idea that "they have enough money to do it" is incredibly naive. Rewriting all the basic software primitives of the iPhone, or the Mac, or iCloud, or CloudKit, or choose whatever massive surface area this legislation impacts, is not a matter of simply spending enough. Doing so requires the time and attention of the very few subject matter experts who are able to competently do it. The true cost is to your strategy, your business plan, and your product roadmap.

So it becomes a purely business decision: Do we risk a 10% global revenue penalty to release this globally, do we release this everywhere the DMA does not apply, or do we simply not build it? And make no mistake, even if Apple moved heaven and earth to try to comply with DMA they are STILL RISKING the full 10% penalty if the EU decides against them.

Releasing the model to bad actors at the same time as the major OS, browser, and security companies would be one idea. But some might consider that "messed up" too, whatever you mean by that. But in terms of acting in the public benefit, it seems consistent to work with companies that can make significant impact on users' security. The stated goal of Project Glasswing is to "secure the world's most critical software," not to be affirmative action for every wannabe out there.

The FTC article links to the federal complaint[0] which names the third-party data recipient as Clarifai, Inc.

"In September 2014, the CEO of Clarifai, Inc. e-mailed one of OkCupid’s founders requesting that Humor Rainbow give Clarifai, Inc. (i.e., the Data Recipient) access to large datasets of OkCupid photos."

[0] https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/OkCupid-MatchCo...

Former Apple employee here. This is a deeper quirk of Apple culture than one would guess.

Each and every Radar (Apple's internal issue tracker is called Radar, and each issue is called a Radar) follows a state machine, going from the untriaged state to the done state. One hard-coded state in this is Verify. Each and every bug, once Fixed, cannot move to Closed without passing through the Verify state. It seems like a cool idea on the surface. It means that Apple assumes and demands that everything must be verified as fixed (or feature complete) by someone. Quite the corporate value to hold the line on, and it goes back decades.

I seriously hated the Verify state. It caused many pathologies. Imagine trying to run a burndown of your sprint when zero of the Radars are closed, because they have to be verified in production before being closed, meaning you cannot verify until after the release. Another pathology is that lots (thousands and thousands) of Radars end up stranded in Verify. Many, many engineers finish their fix, check it in, it gets released and then they move on. This led to a pathology that the writer of this post got caught up in: There is lots of "org health" reporting that goes out showing how many Radars are unverified and how long your Radars stay in the unverified state on average. A lot of teams simply close Radars that remain unverified for some amount of time because they are being "graded" on this.

> Am I missing something?

You are indeed missing a TON. A lot of Open Claw users don't give it everything. We give it specific access to a group of things it needs to do the things we want. If I want an agent to sit there 24/7 maximizing uptime of my service, I give it access to certain data, the GitHub repo with PR privileges, and maybe even permissions to restart the service. All of this has to be very thoughtful and intentional. The idea that the only "useful" way to use Open Claw is to give it everything is a straw man.

I have given the “never trust the judgment of someone who says it should be a one-line fix” so many times I am basically doxxing myself with this comment.

PV is fairly unique in that land is not required. It can be installed over existing land uses such as rooftops, canals, parking.

> You cannot build a good AI phone without first building a good phone. You cannot build a self-driving car without starting with a good car, etc.

More like you cannot build a self-driving car without starting with a good phone. See Huawei.

Comedy requires deep thinking, powers of observation, and self-reflection.

So among Harris voters, the assassination was about as popular as a Trump policy. And yet here we have people trying to say it's popular among lefties. We do not deserve nice things.

Put simply: It is in the national interest to have the world's most talented technologists here. It is yet more in the national interest that they work here, for us, and not for our enemies. One of the best ways we can compete with China is to attract their best and brightest with our free society and high wages.

The average L5 SWE salary at Google in the SF Bay Area is $215,000 [1].

1. https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en...

Why would tribal land management be "natural" but not more recent land management? It seems more like we just need to decide how we want the land to be and burn or not burn to achieve our goals.

> And immigration on top to plug the gaps.

And there it is. This narrative that immigration hasn't been a constant and deciding factor in the development of the West (and pretty much everywhere else) is so wild. Stability of an insular population is the absolute exception of history.

Corporations are people, so no, we don't have the state.

In the U.S., around 86% of kids graduate high school[1], around 63% of high school graduates go to 4-year colleges[2], and around 64% of them graduate within 6 years[3].

By that logic around 35% of 24-year-old Americans have bachelor degrees. More than a third, but not by much.

[1] https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/coi/high-school-g... [2] https://educationdata.org/college-enrollment-statistics [3] https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40

Do you fail at driving if you touch your brakes? I don't think so. The best drivers in the world certainly don't seem to think so. It's just one of the control inputs to driving your vehicle. Staffing levels are a resource company execs can increase or decrease as they see fit for the company. This idea that they should only hire someone if they predict they will need them forever is frankly bizarre and indicates a profound misunderstanding of what shareholders expect of their execs.