Nobody is really in favour of limited government because when push comes to shove those who profess being in favour of limited government remain so only until they get into power.

If what you say is true it means lots, not none, are in favor of limited government because they do not seek power over others and thus wish for possible power over them to be minimized...

Basically the age-old axiom, most people just want to be left the hell alone.

Being for limited government, I am also against the 10 year moratorium on AI regulation (and giant bills generally).

But also that is because what are regulations going to do? They can't stop you from accessing a web site in another country running some hyper advanced AI model, or downloading AI malware that can jack your system.

All regulations can possibly do is retard (in the classic sense of the word) tools in the states or countries of whatever places are stupid enough to even try to regulate AI. It's going to hurt enough companies that try to follow the law that it's a bad idea and would provide no benefit you are seeking through the regulation.

In fact if you really believe AI can even be dangerous at all then the only possible thing you can do is to advocate for as much AI as possible to counter the "bad" AI.

The summary claimed the company had $50m in revenue (the real number, not corrected).

I can't understand how it got any revenue, ever - if you ask any real AI to produce code you'll have results in a minute or so.

But if it was backed by people writing real code, answers would have taken many minutes to hours to produce! Heck just the time to write a summary of the request would seem awfully long.

Who would use that after any trial? Who was paying them at all?

Or was it 700 engineers each with a trial chatGPT account just pasting questions and answers back and forth between user and chatGPT?

Yeah I ran into that also, very sad to see. What a crime against humanity. Thanks for the link.

Sorry I'm late to response but you simply have to pay $25 more for the ticket and get Earlybird to auto-checkin, then you are either in A or B section and can get a good seat anywhere.

Even adding that Southwest tickets are still usually cheaper than other airlines.

I have not looked into this myself yet, but in order to write anything GPT needs to have a direction to go in... so I assume the way it would work is you'd write a summary of the issue and chatGPT would fill out details?

Maybe an indicator that the issue was written by ChatGPT along with a link to the prompt that generated the summary. Then you'd have original intent of the issue.

I can kind of see the point where people might want to block it altogether but it does come off as a bit luddite. But I can see a very real danger of number of issues rising dramatically if they are easier to generate.

I agree with his description of Spirit and Frontier. Ultra budget airlines built around making sure the airline paid the minimum price for everything (like seat cushions) and the customer paid as much as possible (like for a carryon larger than a purse).

But Southwest? Even with the VERY UNFORTUNATE changes they are making around seat reservations, even with that I would vastly rather fly Southwest than those other two - or frankly even United.

Southwest has OK seat size and seats. They ACTUALLY HAVE under-seat storage, unlike (again) United. They have really reasonable policies around re-booking or cancelling flights. They have been to date extremely customer friendly in a way zero other airlines I have flown have been.

Southwest has been the only airline I have been on to really strike a good balance between cost and services.

One interesting possibility Apple's chip has that Qualcomm does not, is that it could do things like lean on the AI chip for additional help processing the incoming signal, or any other hardware in the phone.

I also figured that the first try from Apple would not be quite as good, it will be interesting to see how fast iterations improve.

It's strange I had been seeing some very angry takes on X about story changes in Lilo & Stich - but I guess they were not problem enough to drive people away!

Personally I never saw the appeal of the original or Stich himself, but I have to say I have seen that many, many people just LOVE stitch.

Disney really needed a win like that... though I'm sad that may lead to more live action remakes, which I thought were on the way out. But if they can just preserve the heart of the original, I guess they are OK...

If you think that there should not be a government run social media (and there should not be)...

That ALSO means we should not be funding any government media, like PBS or NPR.

If you disagree you have to distinguish what is the difference between social media and other media outlets.

Hahahah, reminds me of one bank claiming "Security is our highest priority!"

One small interactive play I attended a while ago was in a SciFi setting where I think we all started off as passengers of some kind... anyway in the briefing they gave us they reminded us all that "Your safety is their 7th highest priority" and never has something felt more real. :-)

Those who do not watch movies are doomed to live them.

Here we have someone literally making an AI MCP, as if they have never watched TRON!

What about a face is it that needs range information - the "R" in "lidaR"? Do people carry around models of someone else's face

Yes that is exactly how Face ID works, a 3D model of the face scanned with "infrared dots" - not exactly LIDAR, but similar.

However just as important is a big use of the rear LIDAR on phones - range finding for the camera! And 3D modeling a face in particular is precise focus on eyes, really useful in portrait mode.

There is also some use of 3D scanning of objects but I would say that's far less used than the range finding aspect (and the fact it does store a depth map with photos that can be used to apply artificially selective focus).

Tell me, which model of phone do you have which uses LIDAR?

From the link you provided:

The feature was later included in the iPhone 12 Pro lineup and subsequent Pro models.

So all those since I've had several since the 12 (always Pro or Pro Max models).

blinding them seems to fall outside the range of allowable behaviours.

In theory if you laid under a car just after it had driven the heat could kill you. Yet cars still exist.

There are all kinds of things that are allowed because the dangerous conditions are rare. Being close enough to LIDAR to get blinded would be one of them, it does seem pretty obvious to me as you say that if it could blind random passers-by on the street it would get banned... my original post is more worded about the rare case, that you get really close to the LIDAR unit to look at scratches in the cover or whatever, then is it a danger? It still seems like it might be but probably mostly not. I would personally try to be sure it was powered down before I got too close.

I hope not, many phones also use lidar.

That is true and in fact we are asked to stare into them for facial recognition... :-)

However, it seems like the LIDAR on a car would be quite a lot more powerful - the phone LIDAR has to reach just a few feet, I think car LIDAR is out to around 200 meters or more!!! That much more power makes me think looking right into it when really close, would be a bad idea - but I don't think it's powerful enough it would fry your eyes if you were just walking down the street and the car drove past. I was thinking it would be good to know so as not to look at the car up close around the LIDAR area for scratch examination for example until you knew it was off.

Or maybe they have safety features that if someone is close the LIDAR is disabled.

So if a human happened to look right into an active LIDAR unit, would it cause any damage to the eye? Even though it's not in a spectrum we can see, something powerful enough could mess with some parts of the eye.

I honestly don't know, anyone have an idea?