maybe, but how can you possibly tell - in bulk - if you are dealing with a midget or really a young fish that had no chance to spawn? (which is the point here)
> People will either say "What an idiot, didn't he realise how goofy he looked?" or they'll say "Oh did you see what Jeff did to get the dance party started? We would never have gotten out there without him. I could never do that!".
the obvious difference even right in that sentence is that whether that person actually successfully led or miserably failed
No, it gets it just right. The implicit assumption in this example is that the first person on the dance floor is _not_ quickly joined by hundreds of other people but continues to be awkwardly by themselves for a while, possibly then embarrassing themself by completely failing to attract anyone.
sure it can. First, bomb the crap out of anything reachable and destroy normal economy. Then pull a Syria, a "democratic uprising of the freedom-loving people", perhaps get some help from friends at Al Qaeda or wherever the current Syrian freak is from, and Bob's your uncle.
NK can have a handful of submarine-based missiles that threaten to wipe out say Seoul or LA for example, even after the first strike. It's not a guarantee by any means but it does raise the bar and would probably prevent a situation like the current one.
from what i read, the Strait of Hormuz is mostly used for shipping to Asia now, with the US being a net exporter of oil, KSA and others getting more options to ship via the Red Sea instead, and overall blocking this would be a minor annoyance, not lasting long with 2 carrier strike groups on the way, and most to-be-blocked shipments going to China - shooting themselves in the foot. It seems the historical memories of the 70's mideast oil beef are just that. But what do i know.
I wonder that too, with Gaza with the current approach the only endgame seems to be to either just kill everyone or to displace every single person somewhere else, but if those children continue to have living conditions of animals, their resistance will be of no consequence. Sorry if it sounds harsh, but i think this is not inaccurate unfortunately.
I don't think it's going through Afghanistan. It's probably just re-using Soviet railroads. But it is going through Turkmenistan, which is one of the craziest insane and most bizarre and unpredictable places one can think of, and Uzbekistan, which used to happily host US troops in Khanabad. Just a matter of some cash and some threats of sanctions with either one of those two.
the dude needs a PR win of some kind. I guess he gave up on the Nobel prize and decided to try something else. Aside from that, could really be a chance to end the nukes there and try to topple the regime, who knows what's going to happen, but time-wise now is the best opportunity.
doubt it's really game-changing. Rail is more expensive and the three other countries in the middle can be strong-armed and harassed into stalling or cutting this off.
fwiw they do seem to have wiped out a bunch of opponents recently, some weakened to the point of giving up, others wiped out entirely. ever since the so-called "arab spring" the trend has been pretty steady.
> if we truly understood how LLMs think perfectly we could predict the maximum number of parameters that would achieve peak
It's a bit of a strange argument to make. We've been making airplanes for 100+ years, we understand how they work and there is absolutely no magic or emergent behavior in them, yet even today nobody can give an instant birth to the perfect-shape airframe, it's still a very long and complicated process of calculations, wind tunnel tests, basically trial and error. It doesn't mean we don't understand how airplanes work.
Maybe, but personally i found it much more insightful on the topic of why all companies suddenly went crazy than the Linkedin layoff porn pieces or "it's all AI's fault" hot takes.
True, that AI button is shoved pretty violently in unexpected places, and surprises me in an unpleasant way, since I've never considered Meta itself as a place to search for information, let alone something trustworthy.
But this is actually interesting. Asking for medical information in the past was the realm of Google Search, now a combo of Google/Gemini/Chatgpt/whatever. Could it be they are going to try to bite off a chunk of that market? kind of like how they chose not to compete with Google search in 2010's. But now are taking another pass at it?
Still confused, i show up to "consume content" from people i follow, not from Meta. Sure, occasional trash and spam and ads, and "recommended", and "promoted", but mostly things that people post. If content creators still come to post on say Instagram, which provides distribution and monetization, how does it matter which tools they used? Should Meta then try to acquire say Adobe Photoshop too, to produce better IG content?
Honest question, why do they so existentially need to be a major player in AI? It's a social network that connects people, serves UGC and some spam/ads, and sells advertisement. Same but with photos for IG, same but with messages for Whatsap. Which part of this will die without AI? If they are obsessed with chatting with an AI bot on Whatsapp, just plug in grok or openai like Telegram, is that the killer feature worth bazillions of dollars?
(everything else seems like a failed experiment, VR, Libra, Facebook phone, whatever, nobody even remembers half these things)
i think on Google Maps they can't rate you back (maybe on Booking too?), so depends on the service. I don't review much anyway, but about a couple of times a year I run into a pretty amazing place that I can't help but compliment, and once in a blue moon a really crappy place that really upsets me so I feel like sharing that too. I see absolutely nothing pathological about that.
maybe they should admit they are not special anymore and expand into other large markets like hotels? I don't even care anymore, I just use Google Maps or Booking, whether it's a "property" on Booking or a hotel, each one has it's pros and cons, I choose whatever feels right at the moment from what seems to be an exhaustive list of both. Properties can be more fun and better for larger groups, hotels are cleaned and don't have annoying "house rules" like washing the dishes etc, or chasing the owner if the lock doesn't work. I don't know how many travelers still stick exclusively to properties anymore.
when you work among 180 thousand other people, a good chunk of you energy will be spent on justifying your existence.
in a top-heavy, cutthroat place like a FAANG, people will fight fiercely for promotions (that's half a mil extra cash in your pocket this year!), and for managers that means getting into the newest hypest shiniest projects or fall behind and eventually get kicked out. The way you join hyped-up projects (or even hear about them before it's too late): you invent one if you have the balls and the energy to pull it off, or persuade someone influential to let you join an existing one. So, strong disagree on "managers don't pitch projects".
Well people really-really "want" many other things too, like free money, sex, etc etc. Does it mean that something that started as a way to connect with friends and family must turn into Only Fans for example? Or cater to all those other wants that have nothing to do with friends and family, just to make a few more bucks?
Prediction: faangs will come up with something clever or random or just fly everyone onsite, they are so rich and popular, they can filter by any arbitrary criteria.
Second-rate companies will keep some superficial coding, but will start to emphasize more of the verbal parts like system design and retrospective. Which sucks, because those are totally subjective and mostly filters for whoever can BS better on the spot and/or cater to the interviewer's mood and biases better.
My favorite still: in-person pair programming for a realistic problem (could be made-up or shortened, but similar to the real ones on the job). Use whatever tools you want, but get the correct requirements and then explain what you just did, and why.
A shorter/easier task is to code review/critique a chunk of code, could even just print it out if in person.
Raising on hype != success, most of these lemons will rot before they can even do a small secondary for themselves. Plenty of startups died when the last hype wave ended (which was easy zirp money, before ai). I don't trust anything without a growing revenue anymore, and even then...
bingo! for long-haul flights (>10hrs) i'd even bring two zip locks. Relax and fall asleep right during takeoff while everyone else has to wait for the stupid cart forever.
Sadly, i don't think they care much about what "everyone wants" because with userbase this size they will figure out a way to forcefully shove whatever they come up with into people's faces.
great question, i was wondering about that. I think it's mostly in discovery phase right now, similar to how they dabbled in crypto before, and the largely finished by now "metaverse" experiment. (yes, this dabbling involves a ton of money sometimes). These demos actually show what they might end up using AI for, but whether it's truly game-changing for their business and whether it will be good for the regular users, considering their shitty UI's both in FB and even Instagram by now are grossly obsolete, haven't changed in over a decade despite 70,000 people working there, and are nowadays mostly focused on violently shoving more ads over actual usefulness, is still an open question.
If their business remains a shitty declining buggy 20-year-old Facebook and a 10+year-old Instagram app, but they contribute to advancing open source models similar to how they did with React, I'll consider that a net win though.