WastedCucumber

I'm sure they don't think exposing adultery is inherently bad, but rather that the method employed feels like an excessive violation of privacy.

If you'd like a different example, imagine a man is angry that his ex wife is with someone else now, and uses such a service to figure out where he can find the pair.

> The fact that people are unimpressed that we can have a fluent conversation with a super smart AI that can generate any image/video is mindblowing to me.

The image and video generation capabilities of AI is the most unimpressive part of AI's! It's the LLM's that are the most inpressive. Those might, just might, even make some sense in an OS, since plenty of people are happy to outsource a quick email or script to AI. Hell, what if your OS had a built-in AI to troubleshoot bugs for you? That might even conceivably be an improvement.

> Over in the comments, some users pushed back on the CEO's use of the word "unimpressed," arguing that it's not the technology itself that fails to impress them, but rather Microsoft's tendency to put AI into everything just to appease shareholders instead of focusing on the issues that most users actually care about, like making Windows' UI more user-friendly similar to how it was in Windows 7, fixing security problems, and taking user privacy more seriously.

I'm sure adding AI to Windows would make privacy problems even worse. Not to mention agentic AI could create a whole new class of security problems if not implemented carefully.

Are they going to do age verification? And how?

The only way I can think of would effectively require identity verification as well.

> What’s really the health trade-off compared to having to monitor every tiny little thing

I'd say that there's sure a health benefit for continuing studies on microplastics. Even if they're difficult to conduct, it's probably a good idea to learn more aboht microplastics and health because, barring some new way to remove microplastics, it seems likely that the ambient concentration of them will only increase in the future.

This post is somewhat related and always makes me chuckle:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43929724

Yes.

What's the nuclear option in this context?

In principle I agree that change is possible and good under democracy, but your comment seems wildly out of touch in the present context.he change that I see happening in the USA now does not seem like a change of democratic form, but a move away from democracy, because a lot of core rights/freedoms/structures are under threat: freedom of opinion, freedom of the press, right to protest, and maybe we'll see free and fair elections get weakened too before this process is done.

And none of that seems like a feature to me.

"Rob Mpucce"

IIRC, communication of threats, exchange of rarer nutrients (this is the main symbiosis trees have with the mycelium anyway), perhaps from healthy trees to needy trees. Solething like that? If I find a source I'll edit this comment.

edit: turns out the Wikipedia page is extensive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycorrhizal_network?wprov=sfla...

>the relevance is that these earnings expectations are lower than when the dotcom bubble happened.

[citation needed]

If I understood that correctly, the point made by the talking head is that everything is over valued, not just tech. I mean in a sense it sounded like "it's not an AI bubble, it's an everything bubble."

Try the etruscan shrew, they weigh about two grams.

I don't have an extensive wikipedia career, but I've found that even my few edits to political topics have been accepted.

What did get reverted was a trivial [citation needed] fix, for a musician's page, for a sentence stating they were involved in scoring a film. I found a relevant citation and this was promptly reverted, for reasons that were explained but, at least for me, utterly incomprehensible

Something like 500 BC, back in Athens.

The concept of states, time itself, and trolling on internet forums didn't exist 12k years ago either, but that hasn't stopped ya'll.

There's nothing in that post claiming those problems will never be solved. I understand the claim as "the hardware conponent of robotics needs more work and this will take some time, compared to AI capabilities/software" Or soemthing like that.

Maybe you could clarify what your experience on the matter is, how the state of th art looks to you, and most of all what timelines you imagine?

Yeah I'm with you there. Trump is America's Sulla, Caesar is yet to come.

What do you mean? I don't see how the commenter was saying anything about the irrelevance of US-China competition, in fact some of their points hinge on the existence of that competition, which is why they described the asticle as very US-centric.

Painting roofs (or even all man-made surfaces) white wouldn't do much globally at all, but it might reduce the urban heat island effect. But probably (speculating a bit here) not quite so much as creating more green spaces (or green roofs, for that matter).

I'm planning to go cross country sometime soon and still considering whether to get a bike computer or not. Knowing myself, I'll probably just stick to using physical maps. In my experience using them bakcpacking, I feel more immersed in my surroundings because I check them and the map at the same time, wondering when the next mountain will appear, if the river already took the bend I see on the map, etc. It just feels right, and I'm never in a hurry when hiking or riding anyway.

Plus I think I'm scared to crashing while looking down at GPS, and I think usijg maps would always force me to stop.

This article veers off into solewhat absurd pearl clutching about AGI, but this quote

>"The notion of Artificial General Intelligence is as absurd as the notion of an 'Artificial General Vehicle'"

I find very appealing, while this line

> I once met a former bodyguard of one billionaire with his own "bunker", who told me his security team's first priority, if this really did happen, would be to eliminate said boss and get in the bunker themselves. And he didn't seem to be joking.

I found hilarious.

I don't hold homesteading for all that sensible, as a hedge again apocalypse. Our world is so connected, I think the idea of having a self-sustaining farm at the end of the world is just fantasy. Particularly for folks who have never spent a summer working a field.

Gosh I hope Joachim isn't his real name.

There's a program in Germany related to this, called Kein Täter Werden (to not become an abuser / don't become an absuer). I think it's controversial because the therapy is confidential, even if the participants have committed abuse.

While I don't want to defend the application of "terrorism" to chat control, the examples in your second paragraph don't follow from the definition outlined above. Resistance to Nazis was meant to damage military and administrative capabilities. The Crimea bridge is a valid military target. I think Russian refineries, too, could be considered a valid target, since they support the Russian military. But even if they can't be considered valid targets, the question of intention remains.

And while I'm sure there are some people (from opposites sides of the political spectrum) who would agree that poverty-causing laws and taxation are violence, perhaps even terrorism, there also remains the question of intention.

In contrast, the 2011 attacks in Norway, the Unabomber attacks, and anything the Rote Armee Fraktion did aside from robbing banks, all have a very clear intention to primarily affect public opinion, political discourse, and civil society in general.

My doubt in the parent comment's assertations lies in the intention as well. Certainly this policy would cause fear in some way, but I think the intention of this policy really is just a techno-authoritarian power grab.

Give us some sources sonst bist du einen Eimer.

I also struggle to see any application. All I can think of is delivering emergency rations and cold weather clothing/gear to civilians stranded in remote mountains by a plane crash. But as far as I'm aware, nothing like that has happened since the 70's. Leaving aside the question of who would fund that.

If I understand you correctly, that's normal. But this really isn't the place to ask. Maybe try posting a photo reddit if you don't want to see a doc?

I guess you mean, how does Reddit make enough money to justify being publically traded? All I can guess is advertising.

I didn't expect the direction of this article. I found notion limiting because it was (I'm not sure if this is still the case) online-only and slow. (I switched to Obsidian and have been very happy.) But I was using Notion as a personal note database. In fact your point here:

>A quick look at Notion’s architecture makes it obvious: It’s human-first, not AI-first. That’s great for writing.

sounds like praise for Notion as a note taking tool, which is exactly what it is.

I guess what I'd like to say is that your title is misleading, and maybe a better one would be "Notion is awesome until you wannt AI."