I cringe whenever I see the Image Playground icon on my MacBook.
It somehow looks worse than most scammy image generation apps you see on half-page search ads on the App Store. I have no idea how Apple willingly released it like that.
It was updated on my iPhone to a bland, forgettable abstract icon that’s still fairly mediocre but no longer an ongoing embarrassment for their corporate brand standards.
Win11debloat solves 99% of annoyances with Windows 11 in <5 minutes. I’ve used in as the first step on every Win 11 install for years. It’s mostly just a bunch of Powershell commands disabling/configuring features.
Nothing has ever reverted after an update for me, so it’s a one-and-done thing. Ironically, afterwards Windows 11 has fewer noticeable ads than my MacBook which still continually pushes Apple services/shows/etc in settings/push notifications.
The only setting that I’ve ever seen sneakily disabled in recent years is the Edge default search engine but that's out-of-scope for Win11debloat.
The constitution assigns legislative power to the Congress, and does not allow the President to rewrite law by fiat.
The Department of Defense was established by the National Security Act of 1947 and is still the law of the land until they pass legislation amending it.
The Trump Administration could request the Republican controlled Congress rename the DoD in the NDA, but for whatever reason they have not done so.
So it's correct to say that accepting the idea that a President can rewrite a law based on their own personal whims without Congress is in opposition to fundamental constitutional separation of powers.
Still seems like a really weird hill to die on. It's just branding, as far as I can tell?
And the President of this country has frequently rewritten laws based on their own personal whims, for a very long time now. Trump's actions in this vein might be the most blatant in this regard, but Executive power has been allowed to grow relatively unchecked for a number of decades already, largely because Congress has been unwilling or unable to do anything about it.
Which is why I think opposing this particular abuse of Executive power (if it really is such a thing) is a really weird hill to die on.
“I think there's no decision ever that everyone at OpenAI agrees with,” Brockman says when I ask what his team thinks about the donations. “Even when we were 10 people. We’ve always been a truth-seeking culture. We have this scientific mission of discovery, and reality kind of doesn't care for your own opinion. It cares about what's true.”
After our interview, Brockman declined WIRED’s request for comment on the ICE shootings. Separately, he offered a more general statement clarifying his thoughts on the conversation with WIRED. "AI is a uniting technology, and can be so much bigger than what divides us today,” he said.
His justifications are just an ever changing rambling mess of word salad that never even come close to addressing the MAGA Inc donation specifically, who is this even for?
We're talking about a pretty straightforward donation to the incumbent President's Super PAC, not ASI solving world hunger or whatever.
It is a great day for both America’s national security and AI leadership that two of our leading labs, OAI and xAI have reached the patriotic and correct answer here
He's an administration official openly cheerleading his team. This should be characterized as the insider perspective/spin, not a neutral analysis of the relevant facts.
They're describing the intent of the administration not predicting the future impact on other companies. Essentially making the point that your original question about NSA being able to get whatever they want clandestinely isn't actually relevant because Hegseth/Trump don't actually care this much about Claude doing X or Y -- they were trying to make an example of punishing Anthropic with the expectation they would immediately crumble like the rest of Big Tech, as a warning for anyone else to stay in line and keeps their mouth shut.
I'm 99% confident Starship 11 was actually a sub-orbital test so you can't credit it for successfully entering orbit (my memory is confirmed by Gemini but caveat emptor).
Because when you're testing you put your rocket in an orbit that makes it reenter, but you can still show it has the performance to do it.
They still need to show they can reliably relight the engines to deorbit. They're actually very good citizens there. Prove you can deorbit before putting anything in orbit
They did reach orbital velocity though. If they'd aimed slightly differently they would have attained orbit, and reentry was as difficult as if they had done that.
That link is specifically discussing actions the government takes in war. Like, a real, ongoing, war where it's accepted extraordinary actions may be necessary that conflict with peacetime rights to private property (it was written during World War 2).
A classic hype merchant sales pitch: believe me, I was a doubter just like you, but I saw the light thanks to [insert latest model]!
(Which for anyone familiar with your long comment history as a regular HN poster, is comically absurd to imply. You've been reliably adamant that AI will demolish this or that entire industry overnight for years at this point).
GP commenter got my attention during the last few days. Judging by their claims of productivity, they should have been a billionaire already. I'm curious to know their motivation behind making such outrageous claims.
I’ve seen their outrageous comments so often I wonder if it’s Sam Altman’s alt account. Probably the biggest AI snake oil merchant on the forum these days, with a sadistic pleasure at seeing people losing their job to AI.
> You've been reliably adamant that AI will demolish this or that entire industry overnight for years at this point
We'll see who's right. I never said "overnight". Let's check in at the decade's end.
Y'all dunked on me in 2019 when I said AI was coming for Hollywood. Have you seen Seedance 2.0?
It's coming for us too. I've written five nines, active-active systems that handle billions of dollars of money movement daily. These systems can work in those contexts. I didn't think we'd be here this soon, and I actually thought LLMs were a dead end. I was wrong.
I'm not trying to sell Claude Code. I hate the concept of hyperscaler companies. I want there to be viable open source coding models - there just aren't. I'm merely reporting on my findings.
I sit at my machine for hours now in a prompt, review, test cycle. It's addictive. I'm getting more done at a faster rate than any time in my professional career. I'm excited, and I'm also worried. I don't know what happens after this.
If you've seen how much I praise AI, then you've also seen how much I rail against monopolies. I am worried these giant companies are going to take the means of production from us. I don't think enough people are freaking out about this. It's a very real possibility.
I'm just going to keep building. But you should pay close attention to what's happening.
You're not wrong in principle, but you've made some specific extraordinary claims. If you're really that productive, generating useful work product at a rate of 20 kloc/day by yourself, people would pay just to learn how you're doing it!
Y'all dunked on me in 2019 when I said AI was coming for Hollywood. Have you seen Seedance 2.0?
Being right at the wrong time is often worse than just being outright wrong, I've found.
It somehow looks worse than most scammy image generation apps you see on half-page search ads on the App Store. I have no idea how Apple willingly released it like that.
It was updated on my iPhone to a bland, forgettable abstract icon that’s still fairly mediocre but no longer an ongoing embarrassment for their corporate brand standards.
reply