quantumwannabe

The team behind Cursor and their data were worth $60 billion to Musk, not the app itself.

This would be an awesome product if Siri AI wasn't terrible. At least this will force Google to reinvest in the Nest Hub; Gemini is a far nicer model.

I saw “dehydrated cane juice” years ago as an ingredient in Horizon chocolate milk, though they appear to have dropped the charade and now call it “organic cane sugar”.

The real problem with iOS is that there’s no way to clear an app’s cache without uninstalling it. Every non-indie internet-connected app on my phone has a massive and unneeded cache that consumes gigabytes of space.

Grok Build uses your library and it has the best TUI of any app I've ever used. It has a lot of features that we take for granted in GUIs like scrollable regions, buttons, collapsible panes, and text selection.

I don't know why Codex and Claude Code haven't switched over; both apps have a terrible UI in comparison.

You don’t seem to understand the carbon cycle.

It is basic scientific fact and denying it is the same level of ignorance as denying that CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

All of that would go away with renewable energy and therefore reducing meat consumption would not be "the next frontier" in the battle against climate change as the original poster said.

Cows eat wild grass for most of their lives. There is zero deforestation to feed cattle in the US. The amount of methane is also fixed as it gets broken down into CO2 which is later absorbed by plants.

Scientists didn't miss this; there's just a lot of grifters trying to use people's desire to fight climate change to get them to support unrelated issues.

Doing an appeal to authority is poor form.

But the supply of herd animals is essentially fixed. There isn’t infinite growth. Eating meat therefore does not increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, no matter what vegans who want to ban meat for personal moral reasons assert.

If humans stopped eating meat, the only way to reduce the amount of carbon that animals “emit” would be to kill all of them and bury their carcasses underground where they can’t decompose (as that would turn them into CO2).

Burning oil introduces new carbon into the cycle, animals existing does not.

It’s completely made up. All meat is carbon neutral because animals don’t produce carbon atoms from nothing. They get them from the plants they eat which in turn get their carbon from the atmosphere.

The carbon cycle is basic scientific fact yet confidently ignored by people who hate things like logging and meat.

Or the "Do Not Track" header: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Reference/...

We already tried that experiment. The result was Houston.

If you believe that adding lanes doesn't reduce congestion, then you must also believe that adding transit doesn't reduce congestion.

That’s why I don’t understand why Google’s stock has gone up so much recently. They already have maximum market share of digital ads; they can only lose share to competitors like OpenAI. The only way they can make more money is through paid subscriptions.

More details on the difference between the OpenAI and Anthropic contracts from one of the Under Secretaries of State:

>The axios article doesn’t have much detail and this is DoW’s decision, not mine. But if the contract defines the guardrails with reference to legal constraints (e.g. mass surveillance in contravention of specific authorities) rather than based on the purely subjective conditions included in Anthropic’s TOS, then yes. This, btw, was a compromise offered to—and rejected by—Anthropic.

https://x.com/UnderSecretaryF/status/2027566426970530135

> For the avoidance of doubt, the OpenAI - @DeptofWar contract flows from the touchstone of “all lawful use” that DoW has rightfully insisted upon & xAI agreed to. But as Sam explained, it references certain existing legal authorities and includes certain mutually agreed upon safety mechanisms. This, again, is a compromise that Anthropic was offered, and rejected.

> Even if the substantive issues are the same there is a huge difference between (1) memorializing specific safety concerns by reference to particular legal and policy authorities, which are products of our constitutional and political system, and (2) insisting upon a set of prudential constraints subject to the interpretation of a private company and CEO. As we have been saying, the question is fundamental—who decides these weighty questions? Approach (1), accepted by OAI, references laws and thus appropriately vests those questions in our democratic system. Approach (2) unacceptably vests those questions in a single unaccountable CEO who would usurp sovereign control of our most sensitive systems.

> It is a great day for both America’s national security and AI leadership that two of our leading labs, OAI and xAI have reached the patriotic and correct answer here

https://x.com/UnderSecretaryF/status/2027594072811098230

That's because his American-made competitors charge $50 less than he is charging for his Chinese-made showerhead: https://www.waterchef.com/products/waterchef-sf-7c-premium-s...

The old science fairs actually did find real geniuses. Many kids who placed highly in the Westinghouse Science Talent Search ended up winning Nobel Prizes later in life.

The modern ones are sadly just another checkbox for college admissions, full of cheaters gaming the metrics.

They haven't really added anything to Office since 2013, the last pre-subscription version. There were massive changes between Office 98 and 2013, including entirely new programs like OneNote. They just found a way to get their customers to rebuy the same product every year.

Same thing happened with Adobe and CS6; feature development slowed to a crawl after the change to a subscription.

Only because you chose to walk through the port instead of through town. Google Maps' walking route is shorter than the route that goes through that road, entirely on sidewalks, and only requires crossing one road wider than one car lane per direction (and said road has a signalized crosswalk). There is also a pedestrian bridge across that road that could be used instead, but Google didn't pick it, likely because it connects with "private" property (the convention center's path).

https://maps.app.goo.gl/asfGrRLkLmtpqnps5

Someone didn't read the article.

It most definitely is not. The vast majority of customers at European Starbucks are locals, not tourists.

Do you know if the knife still acts "sharp" when the physical blade is dull or does it still need regular sharpening like a normal knife?

This is likely a prototype for their folding phone, which are essentially just two ultra-thin phones stuck together.

You should tell Taiwan that.

The hardware was good but nothing that an iPad doesn’t have nowadays. It was revolutionary for the time with the detachable keyboard and trackpad and Wacom-like pen. The software was what made it an amazing device though.

In addition to being able to run any regular Windows application, it had the best and most intuitive feeling UX of any tablet in history. Amongst many other features, window management was gesture controlled and Internet Explorer had an alternate UI that moved the tabs to the bottom of the screen to make them easier to reach.

Sadly, Windows 10 removed all the good parts of Windows tablet mode, but its ideas were so good that Apple is still slowly copying bits of its interface for the iPad to this day.