HN generally had good SNR. However when it comes to certain things remotely involving a controversial party, it can inspire lots of off topic/uninteresting/uninformative commenting. Just have to tune it out. Anywho, I totally agree that whatever happens with the metaverse doesn’t make their R&D any less valuable—-motion handling, their work into optics, neuronal signal decoding and a bunch of other multidisciplinary areas of research they’re reaching into. It’s really cool to see some of the things out of Meta AI/Reality Labs, and I hope they continue keeping things open.
I only see this being an issue storing times as strings. Why not store them as integers (like a Unix timestamp) or at least some standardized string format? The only reasonable use case I can think of where you absolutely need all this complexity is if you're rendering a calendar or something similar.
This is typical for court cases. Even if a party may have little to do with what’s going on trial, if they’re a relevant party in any way they can get sucked in and be forced to give a deposition. It’s totally possible to “plead the 5th” here, but the rationale here is all the relevant facts to a case have to be brought to light in order to make an informed judgment.
5G isn’t just about phones. It’s about IoT and all sorts of mobile (and non mobile) devices. Having the ability to transmit more bandwidth albeit at a smaller distance is a big deal. Edge computing helps on the latency front which is also a big deal, information needs to travel less of a distance than being routed over the internet (the laws of physics, particularly the speed of light is the constraint here). In the communication world I’m not sure what could be more important than bandwidth and latency.
Pictures alone are pretty low bandwidth with good compression. While the concept sounds cool, I don't see any immediate application for it. For long distance communication (/interplanetary) it's a problem of latency, not bandwidth. However, transmitting moderate/large length high-res video clips from prompts could be interesting, probably magnitude more efficient than existing compression algorithms.
Apple phones are a lot less ubiquitous than general cell phones. Anything with an antenna and a (e)SIM card can get access to the T-mobile network, so what Apple is providing might be nice but I can't see how they compete at the level SpaceX can. And the global regulatory approvals needed will be a problem for everyone.
I imagine that the satellites can switch frequencies within a small margin as they commonly need to do that when faced with interference. They can already shut off when traveling over countries where they don't have broadcast permission. But yes, it seems like ~2GHz is what SpaceX/T-Mobile is using here, so they'd need approval around those frequencies or more antennas on the satellites for higher frequencies which doesn't make alot of economic sense. Also the penetration will get worse the higher in frequency they go.
Yes, I expect this to be one of many announcements going forward, with Amazon Kuiper and OneWeb coming into the party -- eventually. However, SpaceX has the advantage of vertical integration (they launch their own rockets) which substantially helps with costs.
Line of sight will be needed for upload transmit, definitely. However, with sufficient power on the satelites it should be able to transmit loud enough at lower frequencies (better penetration) so it should be receivable inside of a phone pocket or underneath something shallow.
Getting regulatory approval for the spectrum is one of the hardest problems, the hardest non-technical one. T-Mobile agreeing to allocate some of their spectrum to SpaceX is something that will probably happen with other carriers later down the line. AT&T and Verizon in the US are probably going to explore similar moves if the T-Mobile plan works well (IIRC, Verizon has plans for something with Amazon Kuiper). Wouldn't be surprised to see AST SpaceMobile as a target of M&A if they have something that works.
> Included for free with most T-Mobile plans other than the cheapest plans
This is big. Only concerning part seems to be the large antenna required on the satellites, which would probably incur some extra scrutiny by regulators, but IMO the benefits of something like this far exceed the downsides.
I’m almost certain that Google/Amazon/Apple et al have similar specialized computing hardware, but at smaller scales. We don’t publicly know much about their internal hardware. If they had the infra, I think it would be interesting to see some Tesla cloud service offering indeed.
Cool. Can anyone chime in on how this compares to other ML SoC/ASICs? I know many places are going hard on general purpose GPUs, but I’d imagine ASIC based supercomputers (like Google TPU) are the way to go forward.
You mean the right? I think it's a consequence of people being mostly right handed. It's just easier to reach things to the right over reaching them on the left, for example when sifting through a stack of papers. Similarly on touch screen devices, holding a phone on your right hand means it's easier to reach for a scroll wheel located on the right side of the page opposed to the left one.
I disagree, the difference is still there. It’s gotten a bit smaller, but it’s still there. Some people who are perpetually online on forums will say things like “that’s based” in real life, but out of a diverse group of 100 people how many do you think would understand and say things like that? I’d wager a lot of people may have heard before but probably don’t understand what it means. There’s also lots of localized real life slang that people on forums won’t get. You still might hear it on Instagram or places like that, but there is no ubiquity there. I don’t think it’s changed significantly beyond exposure with more people being on TikTok/Instagram/YouTube and similar networks.
If the payout would be substantial, it would be dumb for Musk team not accept and buy Twitter at that point and do a later IPO at a new price after restructuring. There’s not much for Musk to loose by playing it out like this. In the end they buy it, they don’t, or they settle before then. Paying a large fine is in neither sides best interest. Twitter shareholders have to get the best result : anything less than $50/share would likely be a nonstarter if closing remains an option.
That would lead to more shareholder lawsuits. The $54.20 cash deal is like a golden carrot on a stick, seeing what happened to Snap and the cloudy economic outlook means they would tank in value if Musk sells his shares. They have no choice but to accept it.
Why not? Be more specific. The tree issue I believe could easily be fixed by broadcasting over a lower frequency that can penetrate more materials easy. Wi-Fi for example works at lower frequencies (2.5Ghz/5Ghz opposed to 12Ghz). This is more of a regulatory constraint. The effect could also minimized with more satellites.
Sounds like you have an axe to grind. Think about solutions instead of problems, nobody is asking you for anything. If the physics permits something to happen, if there’s a will there’s a way. If you don’t have the will there is never a way.
Going through court will lead to even more dragged out speculation and hurt Twitter more than any other party. They can't be 100% sure that they will win the case, and will also have to work to run the company on the side in a continuing state of limbo with the acquisition litigation. In the end, even if they win, and Musk must buys the company at the deal price, by the time that goes through the markets may as well have rebounded to make the acquisition price reasonable again. Buying a company isn't like buying a piece of candy and eating it to the point of no return. The amount of money Elon has on paper won't be impacted, which a lot of people are not understanding. The winners at the end of the day would be the lawyers and millions of dollars dumped into fighting a case instead of settling.
> Almost everything in this comment is wrong or misleading.
Feel free to point out specific inaccuracies. I think it's pretty clear.
> Just because EM wants an escape hatch, doesn’t make it so
Yes, never suggested it's legally permissible.
> affirmative obligation
This is armchair speculation. Even if the text might seem to be clear in outsider interpretation, this is a matter solely for the courts to determine and both sides will have an opportunity to make their points across. I stand by prediction of the board ending up settling this case. It will get obviously challenged in court, but it's not "wrong" in the sense of predicting an outcome.
So much noise here and ill-informed comments fail to give a broader understanding of what's going on. Elon bought up Twitter shares early in the year for a reason, because he wanted more control over Twitter. He bought up so much Twitter shares that when it was announced via the SEC, Twitter offered a board seat under the clause that he wouldn't acquire too much % control over the company. He obliged, but then left when he realized he couldn't make the changes he desired at the company. Plus, people on the board at the time, specifically Dorsey, was nudging him to buy out the company as a whole. So he did, hastingly. That was an ill-informed decision and obviously a mistake made with respect to doing due-diligence. In hindsight, before the market crash that price may have made sense. But fast forward today with looming recession talk, it's pretty clear he realized it's overvalued (we know this from tweets about twitter deal being repriced). And so he needed an escape hatch, hence the issue with bots and the unverifiable mDAU was a great talking point. In fact, he may as well be right on the issue as Twitter doesn't want to reveal how they calculate it. What he's trying to do right now is pretty clearly force the board to give a better deal. He's not sold any stock and likely won't unless he's actually out for good. But given the amount of effort and thought he's put into it and making it clear that he should pay a lower price depending on the bot issue, I don't think there's much doubt he's not actually leaving Twitter. Whether the courts will force an acquisition at the current price however, is a looming question. My bet is they settle at a lower price.
He needed to liquidate stock to pay taxes from previous stock options he'd been given either way of the Twitter poll. I find a lot of the comments here to be pretty off-base and ill-informed to say the least.