_Reo

I feel bad for the participants who actually tried and lost to someone who has nothing good to say about them or their hobby.

[flagged]

This sounds like a footgun and not a vulnerability.

Given how generative AI is, they could have kept the name.

> For candidates genuinely lacking skills, our tool doesn't save them - they still fail technical assessments and follow-ups. The system eventually catches those who don't belong.

If a candidate gets the position because they used your tool to fool the interviewers, and they later get fired, then you’ve wasted a huge amount of the hiring company’s time and money as well as the time of the team who has to cope with the situation. I know this doesn’t affect your business model because they got through the interview and that’s all that has to matter to you, but anyone who has had to deal with a bad hire is going to despise tools like this.

> Of course, it will soon be surpassed by the M4 Max chip with a 16-core CPU, but no results are available for that chip as of writing.

The linked M4 Max benchmark is from after the article was published, so I don’t think this thread demonstrates fair criticism.

When you’re aware that Google’s “agenda” is just attempting to include more types of people by default in output, posts like this sound bizarre. Some of the scenarios Gemini generated were ridiculous, but so too are the stereotypes like “CEO = white male” that Stable Diffusion and other models would assume.

It’s hard to trust that people this intensely upset about Google’s issues aren’t seeking to benefit from leaving stereotypes and other biases from training intact.

> You'll get higher resolution and fov

Index only has higher FOV, although if you’re not connecting your Quest to a computer you probably won’t be using the full resolution anyway.

How fast is this compared to rkyv?

But video players are legal.