bloppe

I suppose a grain of salt has to be taken for the fact that this is basically an ad

Hiring an employee, and to a lesser extent opening a bank account, are much higher-touch processes than taking on new users for your massive-scale internet app. With bank accounts and KYC, transactions can be reversed, traced, frozen, etc. after the fact. You can't "take back" API responses the same way.

Clearly, there's no such thing as a perfect exclusion rule at any of these scales, but the false-negative to false-positive ratio seems like it will be way higher if Anthropic starts trying to verify IDs.

The idea that checking for a US ID could possibly stop actual foreign bad actors from using it is also farcical. Millions of stolen identity documents can be bought on the dark web for relatively cheap. North Koreans have been hiring real American citizens for years to infiltrate tons of US tech companies as employees.

And ya, it's pretty easy to hide your intent once you have access.

They are doing all of the above. Investment in new memory fabs is booming. It just takes a little while to get chips out the door.

You can't just change your tenant. I know someone who bought a place and wanted to move in (which is normally a valid reason to evict) and they still had to get a lawyer and ultimately bribe the person (who actually lived in ny for most of the year) 10k to just leave. 1 story but the tenants have a lot of rights in sf

A lot of people's genes will take them out in their 70s but cheers to crispy

Most of the time, human beings driving cars with their own hands and eyeballs are not "liable" for their errors (unless they can be proven negligent or drunk), unless you count their insurance going up. Most car accidents do not end with anybody getting arrested, or sued, or anything like that. Insurance pays out, premiums go up, case closed.

If Waymo can be proven negligent or something, then sure, bleed em dry. But as long as they're acting in good faith and significantly reducing overall road fatalities per mile driven, I think it's actually pretty unreasonable to try to hold them to such a high standard you end up subjecting society to more of the higher fatality rates caused by humans.

App store guidelines already strictly prohibit developers from demanding overbroad or unnecessary permissions, and they expressly forbid locking unrelated features behind irrelevant data requests. Any app that attempts to do so can easily be yanked off the app store by a single complaint.

Then just click "no" if your phone ever asks you to grant permissions like this to a third party app, which should obviously be the default option. Or better yet, don't install the third party apps to begin with. For you, it will be as though nothing has changed.

For the people who want a bit of freedom though, their lives will suddenly get a lot better.

I agree. Safeguarding data and user freedom are 100% compatible, no brinkmanship required.

People will absolutely not blame Apple if the exact thing they warned would happen, and said would be really bad, actually turns out to happen and be really bad.

Apple has very well-funded PR. They will make sure that the EC is blamed.

Then, they get to be the heroes once the law is changed to allow them to come to everyone's rescue by banishing all third-party app access forever. They would ultimately be the saviours.

Obviously there should be a system dialog to grant system permissions. I'm not aware of any kind of system with a capability-based permissions system (e.g. Android, MacOS, browsers, etc.) where apps are allowed to show their own dialog to request permissions. You always have to do something in the system settings to grant permissions.

That's how it should be done. And that would be the responsible way to comply with the DMA.

The law does not require Apple to grant all permissions to all apps for all users. It just requires Apple to ask users if the user wants to grant elevated permissions to specific apps that they download. The user can always say "no", which should obviously be the default.

The situation is that Apple won't even allow users to grant elevated permissions to any 3rd party app, even if the user wants to.

Apple loves to play dumb about this stuff. The EU imposes a pretty straightforward regulation regarding equality of access. Apple seems to come up with all sorts of "solutions" to this "problem", and each one never amounts to true equality of access. They could easily just allow users to decide "Do you want to give this app unfettered access to all your device data, including other apps' data?". Let users decide. 99% of Apple users in the EU will probably click "no". I'm sure they'll make the user warnings scary enough to ward off anybody who doesn't know what's going on.

There are 2 potential outcomes: either the sky really does fall, and there's a meaningful uptick in bad things happening to iPhone users, in which Apple can easily point the finger at the EC and say "they made us do this". Apple looks like the good guys who put up a good fight for their users, but ultimately their hands were tied, and they'll probably get the revisions to EU law they're so desperately fighting for.

The other possibility is that the sky does not fall, and Apple looks both silly and malicious at the same time for ever having suggested that it would, which was clearly in bad faith.

Clearly, Apple cannot afford scenario #2, so I think they will probably never give their users the actual freedom that the MDA requires them to. They will just exit Europe entirely before allowing that to happen.

Conventional commits made it easier to generate changelogs and automate semantic version bumps. I suppose LLMs can usually do that the right way with looser structure, but in the before times it made a lot more sense, and even now is much less ambiguous

How do you figure? Curious as to where the costs come from

The biggest possible tax break is zero tax, which is what you get when they move out of state

My understanding (very informal armchair) is that someone could relatively easily wipe out aedes aegypti using a gene drive with a sort of sex-selective infertility:

Release a few thousand females carrying a gene drive that produces all infertile males, and all fertile females (who all also have the same gene due to it being a gene drive). Every generation, there are more and more infertile males, and more and more fertile females carrying this extinction gene. After several generations (a.k.a. a few years), the population collapses completely.

I vote yes.

It's ok. AI will have replaced most VCs by then and increase the efficiency of capital allocation. The right people will get funded, competition will work it's magic, and consumers will benefit mightily. Nobody's profit margins are safe.

Of course, who knows. There's always another angle you can look at this from

Finally being able to stop paying Intuit $150 every year as a reward for their lobbying against tax code simplification and free e-file is one of the most exciting possibilities for AI imo

The article was written by AI

That kinda sounds like draft PRs. You can make all PRs drafts by default. I guess it would be cool to have a setting where only maintainers can change it to ready-for-review.

It's called a signaling game. Of course it's dumb, but how else do you measure traction besides revenue? Building good software is a small part of running a business.

A pattern I've settled into is to write code but leave a TODO for every narrow thing I want the LLM to do for me. Then just tell the agent to fix the todos. It's often faster and easier to give "instructions" this way

> If the work is performed for $1 or $5000 the government doesn't get a say in that

What if you're getting paid in landscaping?

Back in my day, we did the learning in class, and the evaluation (homework, projects, but sometimes even exams) at home. Seems like AI just flips the script. Now, you can learn anything you want with a private tutor. The teacher can just upload the entire course material to a place where the LLM can rag over it and answer anybody's questions. Learn it on your own time. Then, use class time for evaluation. Do the "homework" in class. Take proctored tests without access to the internet, etc.

Distillation is totally legal and I highly encourage it

That's fair

You must have a low bar for human code review. I've seen that in practice too. But I've also been on teams that took code review very seriously, and frontier AI really doesn't come close to a good human code reviewer imo

You could set up a patreon and print a link to it when appropriate. That's basically what Vim does.