India was the first country to reach Mars on its first attempt. ISRO is a highly capable org, and cost effective. India also was #4 to land on the moon after the USSR, USA and China - beating Japan to the punch. SpaceX is yet to deliver a payload to the moon or Mars - orbit or lander.
OpenAI also has infinite money, and the graph for money/lawyering gets clamped well below what OpenAI can afford. It's going to end most other corporate courtroom tangles: with an undisclosed settlement and a well-publicized partnership.
Unsurprising. Apple seriously thought the iPad would replace computers and usher in a "post-PC" word during their "What is a computer?" ad campaign era. Now they are sticking phone chips in laptop chassis.
The strait was open with no tolls before the Israel/US attacks. Everyone with a brain and a modicum of imagination (except Trump, apparently) knew for decades that Iran had the latent capability to close the strait, and hence preferred either a diplomatic resolutions or a defacto detente.
> I wonder if anyone is going to learn a lesson about overregulation.
Regulation - or more generally - formalization comes with scaling up. A skunkworks project can innovate really fast, and has no integration and scale needs. When you want to scale up any project (hardware or software), integrating and scaling become a real bitch, and you need to ensure that everyone is on the same page or face costly "silly" mistakes that history is replit with.
You can't magick away coordination challenges by labeling the process "red tape." This happens every single time any small nimble organization grows beyond certain thresholds. On a personal level, organizing a trip for 3 friend is process-free, but for 10+ people requires checklists and heavier processes, for 30 people it becomes a nightmare requiring professional assistance. Low probability events become regular occurrences when you scale, and you have to plan and/or mitigate them adding "red tape".
Consumer hardware costs are external. We are in the era of ignoring externalized costs, for example, Windows 11 hardware requirements, social media harm, and mainstreaming of gambling. Maybe the pendulum will swing back in the future, but today, line-going-up is the prime directive.
When was the last time you used a vintage computer? I couldn't believe how long people had to wait for the start-up (and shutdown) processes; and there was no hibernation! (Windows 9x/System 7.x). Modern instant-on functionality is 1,000,000 times better than that
GP sounds like someone complaining about gore/horror being written and filmed by people who never studied anatomy/physiology or sliced open cadavers. Accuracy is not the point of body horror, and fixating on it misses the point of the genre while patting oneself on the back. Same goes for Sociologists/romance novels and infosec folk/hacking scenes: remove your professional hat and enjoy the art for the fiction it is.
eons ago, I migrated a frontend to Typescript and caught a lot of type-related bugs[1]. It was a 5kLoC, fast-moving productized prototype written by a team of 5. I won't ever do dynamic-typed plain Javascript in a team ever again, type-checker is superior to human code-reviews when it comes to catching potential bugs. Then again I prefer codebase stability of clever code or "expressiveness"
1. 20% were type-coercion bugs, 30% were non-boolean values being passed to boolean-named fields (with some overlap with the former). Linters have come a long way, but compile-time type-checking is better in almost every way.
> Prohibiting a user of your software from modifying it and using it to run their business goes against both freedoms 0 and 1.
It does not prohibit modifications - it just demands that those who exercise the freedoms share their modifications under the same license, and most businesses balk at that.
> The anti-commerce bent of a subset of the free software zealots hate business so much...
The root of the problem is actually the anti-free-software bent that business zealots have, because they want to be able take code for free and make money off of it without giving any of their changes back under the same terms; open-source contributors are not suckers to be exploited. Things would be so much better if the moochers weren't trying to capture all of the value downstream of other people's work, but just some or even most of it.
> if this stuff further exarcerbates the loneliness epidemic and atomization of society, will you be able to live with yourself you think?
Looking at the 30,000-foot view of how society is set up: laws, economic system, employee incentives, etc, do you suppose it matters what the individual contributors think? I say this not to absolve anyone of responsibility, but to point out the obvious outcomes of our incentives across the strata (polity -> shareholders -> boards -> C-suite -> employees)
I will bet you dollars to donuts, somewhere inside OpenAI is a frequently-used revenue dashboard, but not for loneliness - if anything, OpenAI will make horny models and tout itself as a solution to loneliness, a la character.ai - if that earns them more money.
> Plus I highly doubt a provincial government contract in Canada will be a major influence on a Elon's dumb twitter politics.
I don't think the decision was meant to influence, rather, it's self-defense against said "Elon's dumb Twitter politics."
Americans having challenges conceptualizing how problematic Starlink is to non-Americans: imagine the same satellite service was provided by Huawei - but helmed by Chinese Elon.
How do you know simple detection was the most Anthropic did and nothing more actively nefarious? The self-reposrted motivation was animus against "distillation attacks", which suggests active server-side countermeasures that could range from the overt (IP or user account bans) to covert (downgrading model performance or poisoning the response)
1. The answer is 3.: USA, USSR, and the European Space Agency