153 karma · joined April 19, 2017
I wouldn't be surprised if they move production back to the UK assuming Pi 500+ starts doing well.
I don't think it was about saving battery power. Jobs was smart in convincing people to focus on web stack for apps - Flash was king of rich app experiences, and java [inc applets] for corporate apps. Apps went iOS native batteries got drained in other ways (large video & photos, prolonged use). Just think of the costs, energy and time spent over the next 15 years maintaining multiple code-bases to deliver one service. The web remained open, where as mobile went native and closed-in.
Then again, what would've been the domain name, x.x ? oh boy.
No, you are. I suggested they're not exactly a small player, considering that DMA is trying to also appeal to local entrepreneurs/startups - and not stand for consumers too.
Personally i use any channel that suits my need and budget, including Booking, Google, etc, but DMA is regulating for 450million people so, I can see their side of argument.
> Why not regulate Spotify
what about them? not a Spotify user - so what can they do that say YT Music, Amazon Music, Apple etc aren't allowed?
curious to read what arguments you have against or in favor?
From what I understand, in European countries (inc EU) both public and private sector rely predominantly on US and Asian imports for Computer Hardware, Software and Digital Services.
With DMA, they're looking to level the playing fields for local entrepreneurs, and likewise for small firms from say, developing economies such as in Africa or Middle East for example (the neighborhood).
Also worth noting, that, Europe has a massive problem with brain-drain and a rapidly aging population. If local entrepreneurs can't compete with Asian or US tech giants, they have to move to Asia or the USA.
I'm impressed. Although, a little late in the race to compete with US or Chinese PC makers. However, they've a good chance to influence drone and robotic computing, same goes for Arduino.
Consultancy A submit work, Consultancy B reviews/tests. As A increases the use of AI, B will have to match with more staff or more AI. More staff for B, mean higher costs, at slower pace. More AI for B, means higher burden of proof, an A vs B race condition is likely.
Ultimately clients will suffer from AI fatigue and inadvertently incur more costs at later stage (post-delivery).
personally, I think those hacks are cute and handy, but once you recruit well, reward and empower your staff, leading becomes much easier. At google, that approach probably helped more with their ESG policies than staff productivity. In Jobs' case, probably helped "him" stay focused rather than his staff, a meditation technique of sorts lol
Re: Juries. wasn't the main reason to prevent the world outside the court from influencing their decision?
[1] I think it's on How Google Works
Java's from the era [1] of virtualization : machines, languages, web (with applets, flash etc) where you focus on writing code once, and delegate the running to a VM, reaching an ever growing list of platforms/devices the VM knew.
But then came Steve book of Jobs and vajazzled so-called phones and desktops, far better than Bill electronic Gates. Why write an App in java and have that run [2] on Phones, Web, Desktop and Server when you can create N-code bases, one for each platform and device?? Oh and why would you want games in Flash [3] when you could be saving your battery to watch a cat tumble over a dog in 8K definition???
Seriously though, I think, the vm era is going to come back in the next few years, and expand into new areas, such as UI vm to deal with os/platform specifics. A healthy-level of tech decoupling is a good strategy, for everyone, but not full isolation. The vm model is much better for consumers and devs - far less lock-in, more future-proof [4], more freedom to innovate and try new markets. Usually, the vast majority of consumers and most devs have ordinary / run-of-the-mill issues. Most popular apps/sites are about shopping, basic entertainment, library-functions (search, referencing, reading), and chatting.
[1] 80s/90s [2] with slight platform variations [3] Flash or some alternatives. Jobs banned Flash for security+energy consumption reasons. [4] abstract/wrap intricacies of lower layers
Hence we're seeing Apple, Bytedance, Amazon (no doubt Google) etc make regulatory compliance a bigger part of their core business than ever before - prevention in favor of treatment.
Your team's case seems unfortunate, given the narrow scope in the trials. My initial guess is that anything involving eye-scanning could trigger Biometric ID (iris recognition) compliance worries. I get your concern about future tech developments, I also think businesses (startups) have to find new ways to account (adapt) for these changes/requirements - "bureaucracy" will naturally increase.
the biggest value in these networks is real User-generated content, you can't beat billions of real users capturing real content and sharing habitually.
even if wording in the Terms permit certain research/usage, you've got market and political climates to consider.
Recent Gnome sequencing research is revealing that actually a Gene (downstream) doesn't necessitate a Health/Medical Condition (upstream) [1]. I think we need highest security measures, user education and Regulation when it comes to DNA, medical records, and biometric data (face, finger, iris, voice etc).
Charles Darwin & Co documented their theory of evolution well, there's enough ancestry there for most i think, at least as a solid starting point / platform. My guess would be if there was more education around theory of evolution (science), there would be less interest in Ancestry services (DNA based), leaving only a Medical case for them, and hence demanding greater protection/security.
[1] A biological relativity view of the relationships between genomes and phenotypes, Denis Noble - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2012.09.004
you said you were ex-google, how come the privacy policy surprised you? privacy around user-data is big concern, especially for tech giants. Some companies are forced to leave entire Markets, to adhere to privacy/use-data policies.
[1] a computer + a language + dev tools
you've told us about your friend (hello there friend), but not said anything about your background / the context in which you're "starting". So...
It's generally aimed for those studying Computer Science and/or have deep interest in Theory of programming + computation.
Knuth loves algorithms, he even has algorithm on how to Read the book and approach the exercises (difficulty, mathematical complexity etc).
that business model has long gone in my view - new businesses will move in and innovate in that vacuum.
sounds like Clayton Christensen
as this event turned into a farce, it's evident that neither the company nor it's key investors accounted much for the "bus factor/problem" i.e loosing a key-person threatened to destroy the whole enterprise.
for me this a failure in Managing Risk 101.
They've invested over $10bn in this affair, even for MS it's massive - a clearer, more reassuring message would've helped, than "we remain committed..."
What you could do though (i'm not an economist) is to periodically introduce Monetary and Fiscal Policies that reset/adjust the economy (outside a government's influence e.g. Central Bank + Supreme Court).
Google vs cGPT it's neither here nor there in this case, after all Google research drives cGPT, their market focus differs.
The OP is directly mapping Frankfurt's depiction of Bullshit atop the current AI phenomena, mainly because how generative AI approaches "truth".
Natural languages (NL) differ greatly from computer languages (CL), especially on grammar (NL tolerates vagueness) and semantics (meaning, truth). Loosely-speaking, when AI generates NL text it relies on LLMs for context, structure, length etc, a kinda "the model suggests so". However, where content is computer code, even computers can test & verify the output. With NL content on the other hand, the end-user has to essentially test & verify the output to establish truth, meaning.
In my view, the main difference between a Human Bullshitter and a Automated Bullshitter, is that AI can potentially improve exponentially (as smart tech does), thus leaving the end-user (average person) severely overwhelmed.
it's not for me means that I wouldn't buy the product or invest/fund it, but i saw potential in two market segments "impulse buying" and "gifting". my message was mixed and clearly stated that - usually businesses/inventors/makers like mixed feedback.
all the best.
She's a successful inventor & youtuber, good on her. the product is not bad actually, a great impulse buy (gifting), just not for me.