Tmobile does it as a service but it’s a paid one and inconsistent in accuracy. I had it for free as part of a plan for a while and told them no thanks to an additional charge. Not sure it’s worth paying $5/month.
This is right on the line of creepy surveillance and interesting public art project. I kind of like the idea but not a fan of the fact that it’s recording in stealth. I wish it were more transparent about it. Most people wouldn’t care anyway and it removes some of the discomfort of listening in on a bunch of strangers.
It’s of course troubling that AI images will go unidentified through this service (I am also not at all confident that Google can do this well/consistently).
However I’m also worried about the opposite side of this problem- real images being mislabeled as AI. I can see a lot of bad actors using that to discredit legitimate news sources or stories that don’t fit their narrative.
Or, perhaps a mashup of both???
I don’t understand the folding phone thing. It feels like tech now is all about creating ridiculous features and tech companies trying to convince us that we want them while ignoring things that would actually be worthwhile like repairable phones, headphones jacks and minimal bloatware.
I think I read somewhere too that AIs were actually better than people at captchas.
Why do tech companies keep pushing this crap on us when society has clearly communicated that it is dumb?
They’re just as ridiculous and overpriced as you’d think.
If I remember right, OpenAi started with this model too, and they do lots of shady stuff. Not that this is the plan for Proton, but I completely agree that simply creating a nonprofit that owns the for profit brand doesn’t guarantee good behavior.
I still don’t know how that works. Discord seems like the worst possible substitute for reddit. It doesn’t work at all the same way and search sucks.
I’m currently working for a place that has had recent entanglements with the govt for serious misconduct that hurt consumers. They have multiple policies with language in it to reduce documentation that could get them in trouble again. But minimal attention paid to the actual issues that got them in trouble.
They are more worried about having documented evidence of bad behavior than they are of it occurring.
I’m certain this is not unique to this company.
Yeah I think the masses are going to be a tough sell on Linux until computer manufacturers start offering Linux builds with a pre-installed instance.
I’m sure there are places that do it but there’s probably money to be made in just setting up Linux on machines for people.
Wow, this is bleak.
I read somewhere (I think the deloitte tech survey from a few years ago) that many people have replaced their pc with smartphones and use their phone as their primary tech device. Would be interesting to see if any of these low-level skill folks are actually high (or higher) on mobile skills.
I look forward to Apple Marketing coming up with their usual line of nonsense, like a meaningless name for an existing capability that they are claiming to have invented.
Nice! I got it right after the latest version came out but that’s been a while. They do sales pretty regularly though. It’s definitely not as massive as Adobe wrt features, but they cover the essentials well.
Guys, seriously. The entire Affinity Suite is $150. Paid for updates through the current version. It’s solid.
Dump Adobe.
Holy shit what a ride that was.
It’s clear from a lot of stories like this (severe customer mistreatment) that United employees are miserable people who hate their jobs but this is nuts. I hope Dr. Dao got a huge settlement from United.
I don’t have much direct experience working in agile since I tend to work on the business side but I can tell you that the term agile is WAY overused. So many projects are described as agile when they are just waterfall with more steps. Leaders love to say they are working in agile because it sounds ‘techy’ and cool, but I don’t think they fully appreciate what it is vs other methods. I wonder if a lot of the failed projects described in the article are some of those agile in name only kind of things.
My thinking is that it reads like the author is dismissing the whole notion that AI has risks and that the folks raising concerns were just repeating an overblown doomsday narrative.
That’s what I thought and I expected to see a lot of promoting for the shiny new things and dismissing safety efforts as dampening innovation.
The timeline is absolutely ridiculous considering the scale at which Google play operates. However I otherwise don’t feel a bit sorry for them. It’s probably a foreign experience to most of the Google team to have a competitive challenge and if they are up to it they’ll be fine. If not, I guess that’s the free market at work…
(Also, is it Epics entire business model to just sue their way into relevance? I’m happy to see the big tech firms squeal but seriously it’s like Epic wants their entire brand to be about suing competitors.)