That’s true globally, but in the US, iPhones are 60% of the smartphone market. In the US, iPhone users are also younger, more affluent, more educated, and I suspect more likely to fly than Android users. iOS users also dominate in app spending. And from a practical standpoint, 93% of iPhone users are on the latest version of iOS within six months, compared to 20% of Android users, which is huge when it comes to development costs.
According to the post, this result was first derived for gluons in a previous paper. That paper was provided to the model as context, and then the model was asked to derive an analogous result for gravitons, which presumably has not been done before. The authors claim it would have taken "considerable time" for human experts to derive the graviton result.
I don't see any reason to believe that this exact problem was solved before in the training data, but it's definitely an incremental result based on a very similar problem that the model had seen before.
> Vulkan is an example of how the AAA gaming industry is skewed towards rendering quality and appearance. AAA game studios justify their budget with those very advanced engines and content, but there is a growing market of 2D/low poly game, because players are tired and realized they want gameplay, not graphics.
I think the driver here is more likely the financial reality of game development. High-fidelity graphics are incredibly expensive, and small game studios simply cannot produce them on a realistic timeline and budget. Would consumers reject indie games with AAA-quality graphics? I think not. It's just that few such games exist because it's not financially viable, and there is a large enough market that is fine with more stylized, lower-fidelity graphics.