dmarcos

Battery and computer puck. There are photos on the site

I’ve flown with it a handful of times without issue. Both in cabin luggage and checked in but I guess I’m risking it in the latter.

Not sure how a robot filter remover would work on the DWARF 3 that is reliable and works around loss of alignment and the exposure adjustment. I would love to find a solution for next year. Also wonder how can one test it out beforehand. I don’t want to burn the sensor ha ha

I was capturing video and removed the magnetic solar filter as quick and carefully as I could. It worked but didn’t love the results. Hard to not move the telescope a bit that causes realignment and then obviously it has to readjust exposure that takes a moment. Same when putting it back after totality. I’m also looking for advice. We have another chance next year in Spain!

I have a Dwarflab DWARF 3 (also mentioned in the post) that I highly recommend. It’s one of those gadgets that ended up using more than expected when I bought it. I toss it in my luggage and I got to capture really nice sky pictures with little effort (Marfa TX, Patagonia, latest total solar eclipse in Spain)

From blog post:

“It generates both image frames from novel views and explicit 3D outputs”

Model can indeed generate novel views but I don’t think in real time (I could be wrong). If you want to navigate a space in real time as user above was asking gotta rely on the 3D output and the explicit representation will provide continuity. User likely was referring to the limitations we’ve seen on video-style world models like genie and precursors.

I believe so. This is not a model that generates pixels frame by frame from user input like genie 3. Instead, there’s an actual 3D scene / structure generated (point cloud, 3dgs) from the input images.

Yeah. I helped build the temple last couple of years. I highly recommend it.

You can also stay an extra day. Help clean up and leave with zero traffic. I’ve done it myself.

People were already wearing watches along smartphones. Smartwatches didn’t need a new user habit formation.

You can definitely create new habits (like people wearing ear buds for hours a day) but need a strong thesis and cost-benefit analysis that is net positive when considering alternatives.

Also Microsoft couldn’t match Apple taste with effectively all resources in the world. And they really tried.

True taste is interesting because is more like a worldview, a modus operandi, a continuous process… those are harder to replicate.

How and when VAR should be applied is an ongoing contentious discussion not exclusive to the World Cup.

I actually loved the 48 teams. It will probably expand to 64 next cup. More people tune in, nice surprises, upsets, cinderella stories.

Access and price of tickets has been a problem for a long time and getting worse for every live event. Not exclusive to the World Cup.

There are obviously things to improve but the game and experience for people watching and attending was pretty amazing. Leaving in the US I ve had fantastic interactions with strangers everywhere for weeks.

If that’s what a “shit show” is I’m looking forward to more ha ha

Yes. I was there at the france-spain match. Flew in in the morning was directed to the shuttles by super nice volunteers. Reasonable lines that were mostly in the shade and they were handling free water bottles.

The 27 min half time was only in the final. Every world cup introduces changes that will stick or not (e.g golden goal rule). Hydration breaks probably won’t stay.

I’ve followed the sport all my life and referee complains I would say less than usual.

I like having more teams. Might even extend to 64 next time.

These are difference of opinion. Nothing singles out this world cup as a “shit show” as the OP. It was a great experience to me and pretty much anyone I encountered in the stadiums.

I’m spanish living in the US

Hydration breaks a tad weird. Half time shows were pretty subtle, didn’t change the length of the break except for the final. There’s no soccer competition without someone complaining about refereeing. Def always things to improve but I had fun, all people around me seemed to have fun. I flew in an out and always was either public transportation or uefa provided shuttles… It was really well run. Not something you can call a “shit show”

How was it a shit show? I’m genuinely curious. I attended 5 games (Atlanta, LA and Dallas) and was a fantastic experience minus the process to get tickets.

Not worth it. Get a Meta Quest 3 and can vibe code something similar in a few hours. I recommend WebXR that comes with the built-in browser. Easier to distribute, share, collect feedback and iterate than native. And can use A-Frame: open source framework, very accesible and that I help maintain :)

Cervantes was capturing the zeitgeist of the time: reading too many books can make you mad as they were becoming accesible to anyone. We know it’s not true.

People at anthropic don’t have any secret that many people outside already have. Again the burden of proof is on the person making a claim. That you feel concerned or scared doesn’t grant you special privileges to control or dictate a transforming technology.

None of the previous concerns were true and nothing indicates current ones are. It’s extrapolation, hypothetical apocalyptic imagined scenarios and piles of assumptions on how the technology could evolve. What makes even less credible in the AI case is that there’s financial / power to be gained by those making the claims.

And to your point. Don Quixote, the first modern and greatest novel of all times, is about a guy that lost touch with reality from reading too many books

And video games, democracy, novels, TV, cars, photography, cryptography, the Beatles… pick your favorite and read commentary / opinions of the time. Many thought that came with unique risks never seen before and must be stopped!

Every single technology in history has had people claiming potential existential risks that didn’t materialize. Burden of proof is on people making the risk claims. Those have to be specific and unique to that technology to grant special actions.

Splats can indeed come with view dependent colors to represent lighting, reflections… Those are captured in values called spherical harmonics of different levels 0, 1, 2, 3 representing different aspects like diffuse, directional lightning, highlights… Not all splat reconstructions come with spherical harmonics though. And they add rendering overhead.

Besides spherical harmonics splats are also good at representing high frequency detail that is harder with traditional meshes: Hair, clouds, vegetation… notice how trees in these reconstructions already look much better than in google maps / earth 3D views.

Principled: open source is the right thing to do for the greater good

Tactical: Open source is the best tool to advance whatever goals I have at the moment but that could change.

What’s evidence Xi and China are principled when it comes to open source / weights?

What user above said is exactly what I was trying to convey

I don’t know. thinking machines perhaps?

A lot of things have to come together: talent, capital that is not looking to maximize returns, ambition to compete in the marketplace. At peak Mozilla it was clear to everyone that we needed an undeniably successful product to be able to influence the market. Advocacy alone is not very effective.

Only way would be an actual open source model: code + training data

All countries see AI as a geopolitical concern. An open source strategy is smart. It’s effective and also builds good will / soft power. Many see Chinese AI companies as the good guys and root for them. I’m pro open source and also celebrate but still aware this is most likely just the means to an end.

I used to work at Mozilla. I think we are missing a player in the market with a more principled open source approach.

The outcome is plausible. Open weights models though look like a tactical more than a principled play by Chinese companies to overcome the disadvantage and difficulties to access western markets. Two issues:

1. If market conditions change they might decide to close down like Meta did.

2. If as you said models keep getting more expensive to train, is an open weights strategy financially sustainable?

edit: typo

I’m a big fan of Musk. One of the few criticisms I have is how xAI is also inconsistent with original OpenAI mission. I had imagined xAI as en effort to correct and fully embody all original values of OpenAI and that Elon says they betrayed. That makes his criticism weaker and I understand why some can think it was all about control. In his words:

"I'm the reason OpenAl exists. I came up with the name. The name OpenAl refers to open source... The intent was - what was the opposite of Google? It would be an open source non-profit."

I sometimes feel xAI wants to live up to those open values so I always celebrate when they decide to engage in open source. They still don’t fully embrace it. Perhaps because they think is not practical or will make them less competitive?

I mostly agree with you but, how do you square the use of other types of automation that are not AI? e.g computer animation vs hand-drawn, CAD software for engineering and architecture… Are those lesser art forms or we’re just used to them?