As soon as I've tried the VR experience myself for something I actually found useful/entertaining (VR sports), I was immediately sold on the idea. I can't wait for this tech to get better and better
I only rely on IMDb scores and they're still reliable if enough time has passed since the movie release. A movie with more than 6 avg is usually enjoyable, while below 6 is not worth watching. Over 7 is usually very good, over 8 is a masterpiece
I agree wholeheartedly. What none of the review sites have figured out is how to adjust TV show user scores so that they don't score so much higher than movies.
I’m a bit surprised by some of the comments I’m reading, which tend to frame Altman’s words as nothing more than corporate self-interest.
Of course, it’s true that in his position he has to speak in ways that align with his company’s goals. That’s perfectly natural, and in fact it would be odd if he didn’t.
But that doesn’t mean there’s no truth in what he says. A company like his doesn’t choose its direction on a whim, these decisions are the product of intense internal debate, strategic analysis, and careful weighing of trade-offs. If there’s a shift in course, it’s unlikely to be just a passing fancy or a PR move detached from reality.
Personally, I’ve always thought that the pursuit of AGI as the goal was misguided. Human intelligence is extraordinary, but it is constrained by the physical and biological limitations of the "host machine" (not just the human brain). These are limits we cannot change. Artificial intelligence, on the other hand, has no such inherent ceiling. It can develop far beyond the capabilities of our own minds, and perhaps that’s where our focus should be.
But no! The goal is now ASI. Even though AGI hasn't been achieved - in the sense of being to match the best of human intelligence at abstraction, formalisation, and basic letter counting - the plan is to leapfrog far beyond genius.
"We are beginning to turn our aim beyond that, to superintelligence in the true sense of the word."
Meanwhile what we have is an idiot savant product that's sometimes useful but always easily confused, is somewhat dishonest and manipulative, lacks genuine empathy and insight - although it can fake a passable version of them - and even with all of those flaws is being sold as the perfect replacement for all those superfluous and annoying human employees no CEO wants to have to deal with.
Not a bicycle - or a sports car - for the mind, but an autonomous navigation system that handles most short journeys without major damage, but otherwise crashes a lot and runs people over.
The compromising of the initial "Open" in OpenAI was also justified because of... ding ding ding AGI
> We spent a lot of time trying to envision a plausible path to AGI. In early 2017, we came to the realization that building AGI will require vast quantities of compute. We began calculating how much compute an AGI might plausibly require. We all understood we were going to need a lot more capital to succeed at our mission—billions of dollars per year, which was far more than any of us, especially Elon, thought we’d be able to raise as the non-profit.
> Artificial intelligence, on the other hand, has no such inherent ceiling. It can develop far beyond the capabilities of our own minds, and perhaps that’s where our focus should be.
Basically bicycles are limited by muscles, and we should move straight to jet engines. In practice, we often have to go through the intermediate steps to learn how to do the bigger thing.
Being alive in a fallable body isn't a limitation it's a huge huge huge huge huge huge advantage. It's the whole secret.
Why pretend that Nature itself is stupid and incompetent. The evidence is very much stacked against you and all the others who think evolution is some kind of hack job whose shoddy work we'll outdo in literally a few years of computation...
The author claims to have tried all Todo apps, and the lists only a fraction of the Todo apps available on the market. There's a reason why there are so many apps available, and without actually trying them all any conclusion is based on partial data.
i honestly don't think the author is claiming that /literally/ - it's often a figure of speech in English. My kids say it "all the kids at school <insert thing here>" - doesn't mean they meant literally every single student who attends.
This is very sad news. I've been using their password manager since it came out and, although not perfect, was working very well for me.
As a long standing (paying) user of Dropbox (I believe I've been using it since the very beginning), and former stock holder, I believe Dropbox must adjust its course asap. They lack a clear vision for the future and their current offering is way too limited (and shrinking apparently). For the money they ask there's no point in actually paying for their product, unless one is already locked in. For the same price, or even less, one can get an entire Office suite (Google/MS), plus cloud storage. Sure, Google Drive or OneDrive are nowhere close to Dropbox in terms of sync quality, but how many users (business and consumers) are willing to pay such a premium for quality file sync on top of other subscriptions?
Additionally, for many Dropbox is a no go for the simple fact that they don't have a reliable way to edit documents simultaneously. Recently I was looking for a cloud storage solution for a business that needed collaborative editing of documents. I had to go with Office365, as much as I would have preferred not to, because the way they allow multiple concurrent edits to documents is simply not matched by Dropbox (Google Drive is even better but it lacked some features that were essential for the business).
Unfortunately it looks like the stock market is well aware of this. The capitalization of Dropbox has been essentially stagnating for ~5 years, if adjusted for inflation.
I really hope that Dropbox can change its course by doing some brave acquisitions and rebuild its brand image with a more compelling and comprehensive offering.
They're a perfect example of why the old adage of "do one thing and do it well" often doesn't scale as a business.
If platforms can provide a competing service, bundled within their package, many will pick it, even if it is worse quality. Dropbox had to expand (like Proton are - they started with email, then added calendar, Drive for file storage, Docs for collaborative editing, Pass for password manager, etc. Even if I would prefer they spend more time to fix gaps in their Android email app, I completely understand why they have to expand their stack).
Both Google Drive and Microsoft OneDrive have had mass file loss events. Local LAN sync is hugely useful too. Upload speed matters, as does conflict resolution. These are features worth paying for.
iCloud lost all my data twice. Before that, it was always stuck syncing some unknown files. I also ran into problems where conflict resolution in Apples own office apps wouldn't work and I'd just lose one of the version. So yes.
The way I see it is that Apple competitors have given up on premium portable devices. Apple tech is so far ahead that consumers looking for the best non gaming hardware will most likely choose Apple devices.
For competitors, spending a huge amount of money in R&D to try to compete with Apple, will be most likely at a loss. At least until some chip manufacturer (read: Intel) doesn't step up their game.
As a consequence, competition has moved to the middle-low quality segment, one in which they can still compete because of 2 main factors: Apple is not interested in that segment and most companies won't move away from Windows (even if they probably should).
Does it really require that much R&D? Slap one of the excellent AMD mobile processors with built-in GPU in there, standard cooling (they don't use much more power than they did 5 years ago. They surely have the blueprints for the last XPS machines), and a bigger NVME. It's all more or less commodity hardware in a name-your-preference shell.
It’s easy until you can’t really fine tune the software because you use windows and it’ll eat the battery alive for reasons you can’t control as a manufacturer (but customers will still think it’s your fault)
OEMs have been doing basically this for years with their phones for decades at this point, pushing customized builds of Android with every phone they make, this has been successful to close the gap Apple created when they released the iPhone.
I guess a hurdle smartphones didn't have as they were breaking into a new market is compatibility; outside of the tech world, virtually all of corporate and personal environment is dependent on Windows and Windows-only software. Steam has shown it can work with SteamOS and Proton, making gaming on Linux a reality for a wide audience. What's missing is a major OEM to build a high-spec laptop with a custom Linux build to optimize performance and battery life, with a decent Windows compatibility layer and that would provide software companies an incentive to sell native Linux versions and support. Is Samsung really going to keep their laptop line depend on Windows, and leave it on the side-line as they will never be able to really optimize battery life and performance and compare to the MacBooks?
sure, you'll have some unhappy customers but that's not new. They used to sell just fine. I wonder if it's the neverending hunger for bigger margins that's really doing them in. It's not enough to make SOME profits when you need to show shareholders you're making MORE profits.
I noticed there's an entire paragraph explaining what OOP is, but it might be helpful to clarify that OOP stands for Object-Oriented Programming. Even though it's a well-known acronym, adding that explanation could benefit readers who are new to the concept.
