A lot of ram and disk companies have played this game before and gotten burned so they are more conservative than you'd expect. The problem in the past is shortages cause the customers to invest in efficiency or new tech pops up, it's really hard to predict whether to jump in because of the time it takes to get production going
if it gets really bad though the superscalers will guarantee them enough business years out to make the investment worth it
Google fragmented into multiple competing companies as well, that's where OpenAI itself came from. The problem is even after shedding employees into all these startups or established competitors trying to catch up, Google has way more people, money, and compute to throw at things and see what works than the rest of the industry. It's demoralizing and tempting for people to go back, which is also demoralizing
I have pretty negative feelings about all this stuff and how the future will be but also have to admit it's crazy how good it is at so many things I would have considered safe a few years ago before chatgpt.
There are a couple really disingenuous bloggers out there who have big audiences themselves and are "experts" for others audiences who really push hard this narrative that AI is a joke and will never progress by where it is today, it is actually completely useless and just a scam. This is comforting for those of us that worry more than are excited about AI so some eat it up while barely trying it for themselves
The article says it will allow "employers to intercept and archive RCS chats on work-managed devices."
I can read that as applying personal phones hooked up to employer services. I think it's pretty common to force employees to consent allowing their employers to manage their device to get access to work email on it. I'd always assume that just mean they could remote wipe it, but maybe it's even worse than that.
Since this is on Android, this policy should only apply to the version of the Messages app within the work profile, right? If it didn't and could access personal messages, that would be crossing a line.
Reading the post makes it sound like this only happens on managed devices; whether that means "owned and provided by work", "within the confines of the work profile on a BYOD devices", or both, I'm not 100% sure.
> I think it's pretty common to force employees to consent allowing their employers to manage their device to get access to work email on it.
Is it common? I've only been asked to do that once, and I declined. I explained that it's my policy to never use my personal equipment for work purposes or my work equipment for personal purposes. They provided me with a work phone to use, instead.
I don't know how common it is, but it's optional for me (at least). If I want access to work email/calendar/chat (which is convenient), I'd have to consent to some kind of device management.
But personally, I've always said no, because years ago someone at my workplace fat-fingered a command and wiped all iPhones hooked up to company services (including employee-owned personal devices). I've always seen it as a risk to my data if not my privacy.
I’ve worked for multiple companies and only one demanded I enroll my personal phone in their device management. I pushed back in a public channel and they reconsidered the policy. I left shortly after so not sure where that landed.
Everywhere else I’ve worked I’ve had slack/teams/email/pagerduty whatever on my personal device without issues. It hasn’t felt realistic to ask for a dedicated work device for that.
Ok so now it's stupid or malicious to use RL as reinforcement learning on a blog about AI where everyone in the field has been referring to it as RL forever? Even wikipedia puts (RL) after reinforcement learning.
That's the normal way to introduce an acronym in an article.
Anyway, I was just saying that however irritating, it's likely just an omission out of forgetfulness, not deliberate clickbait. A minor application of Hanlon's razor.
Seeing the downvotes and even a flag, it appears I'll have to lower my expectation of people's cultural baggage here.
They've actually had many very successful projects that make the few products and acquisitions you are thinking of work. It's true most of their end products don't work or get abandoned but it stretches their infrastructure in ways that works out well in the long run
I should probably have said "products" rather than "projects". There's a fair bit of extremely good engineering that goes on in the infrastructure side, but when it comes to consumer products, if one of the founders isn't explicitly sponsoring it it gets killed.
They get killed since ROI of putting more people on search or ads is almost always higher than ROI on the new projects, not because the founders doesn't like them.
He definitely has talked about a lot of nerdy books. Don't know about his attention span and not sure how to square what he likes with his values. He brings up the Culture all the time but I have my doubts that he's actually read them
I don't know either, I haven't read the Culture books (yet) either so I can't really evaluate that.
I do believe he read a lot of sci-fi in his youth, if only because that would fit the pattern of a young boy who doesn't get along well with their peers and turns towards solitary pursuits like computer programming. He seems exactly the sort to have read lots of Heinlein.
Almost everything about The Culture will be immediately apparent from stuff Musk talks about, but only about half of it would look like he's understood it.
The only real crimes are reading/writing someone's brain without permission (at which point others may call you names and stop inviting you to social events) or destroying a consciousness without backups (where you'll get permanent supervision to make sure you don't do it again). Most biological citizens have a full-brain computer interface for backups and general fun, called a "neural lace".
The AI Minds in charge of everything give themselves fanciful names, which Musk has used for his SpaceX drone ships.
For the reverse:
Almost every biological citizen is gender-fluid, can change physical gender by willing it, and there's a certain expectation that you try things both ways around so you know how to be a good lover. They dislike explosive population growth regardless of if it's organic or machine reproduction, and as everyone can get pregnant if they want to (because everyone can be a woman if they want to and it all works), it's considered quite scandalous to have more than one child.
It's sufficiently post-scarcity that money is considered a sign of poverty. They mostly avoid colonising planets, instead living on ships, or on habitats so large that if one was located at any Earth-Sun Lagrange point (including the one on the far side of the sun), we could see it.
If not this model, Google at some point is going to get and stay ahead just because they have so many more people and compute resources they can throw at many directions while the others have to make the right choices with how they use their resources each time. Took a while to channel their numbers into a product direction but now I don't think they're going to let up
if it gets really bad though the superscalers will guarantee them enough business years out to make the investment worth it
reply