If you remember the launch of IBM Watson in about 2011 it was meant to be this super smart AI entity and they demoed it by taking it on "Jeapordy!" and having it answer the quiz questions. To be fair, for the time that was kindof impressive but (if i remember correctly) attempts to turn Watson into something industries could actually use and pay for didn't really work. Access to it was tightly controlled.
Its interesting to contrast that with OpenAI chatgpt 3.5 which was launched and then immediately available to pretty much anyone and everyone. Would OpenAI have launched it that way if they werent (as they were at that time) trying to be open? (I get they arent really open but they were at least trying to be then). I guess I'm saying if the first chatgpt 3.5 level LLM had been built by someone less open like facebook or MS would the whole thing have gone in a different direction? Chatgpt being available to everyone seemed to set the pattern for everything since. Was this inevitable? Was it the only way these LLMs could have progressed?
I inherited a project two or three years ago which was consuming a Watson API. Obviously I didn't get a key, but I think they were only using it as a speech-to-text API. Really sad, actually.
I'm in the UK and it always seems weird to me how in the USA its totally normal to publically register yourself as either a Democrat or a Republican. To me seems like the kind of thing that should be private. In the UK I might choose to be a member of a political party but no-one needs to know that except that particular party. Or I can just join no party and vote in private on polling day.
It's because we have open primaries in the US - registering as a Democrat or Republican is only important as far as voting in primaries. In other countries the selection of candidates is internal to the political parties themselves. There are pros and cons for both systems but the US system is fairly unique globally aside from a few exceptions in South America.
Isn't it kinda internal here too? Parties get to pick their candidates how ever they want. The major ones have primaries, but I still don't know if anything legally requires them to respect the votes there.
It's weirder still because you often don't actually have to register with a party, even to vote in the primaries like other commenters have mentioned; it depends on which state and which party. [0]
For example, I just voted in the Minnesota primaries. Ours are open primaries, so you don't need to register with any party and the ballot has every party on it. Though, it spoils your ballot to vote in multiple parties' primaries. So you gotta choose, but you do that privately.
It seems quite weird. Our parties are generally quite weird because were are not supposed to exist in the first place and so most of the rules are sort of ad-hoc.
I don’t belong to one, but it is sort of annoying to not be able to vote in the “primary elections” (where the parties pick their candidates). My state has a strong partisan lean so this is the only election that actually matters here. Oh well.
Malcolm Walker, the founder and his son Richard Walker the current chairman are (for such an ordinary seeming supermarket) surprisingly progressive and have often spearheaded sustainability and corporate responsibility campaigns. Malcolm Walker was an active member of Greenpeace and Iceland worked with Greenpeace on several campaigns over the years.
Richard Walker tried to become a Conservative MP, but when no constituency party selected him as their candidate defected to Labour, who put him in the House of Lords.
Interested in this, but to work on an ipad that has youtube.com blocked via ScreenTime I imagine it probably wont work (unless you unblock youtube.com and the youtube becomes accessible via the browser). Unless they have found a way round this problem?
Yes — this is exactly how I use it on my children’s iPads. I install KidScreen as a Home Screen web app, block the regular YouTube website and other video sources with Screen Time, and allow KidScreen together with its `youtube-nocookie.com` player. The child opens only KidScreen and sees the shelf I prepared.
Its a way to make sure the delivery takes place. A code is sent to recipient and recipient only gives it to the delivery person once item is handed over. Delivery person cant mark item as 'done' without the code. I've seen Uber Eats do the same thing sometimes.
My signature on a touchpad is noticeably different from my paper signature. It’s been a real challenge for me recently as I’ve had to sign a number of paper documents while the “official” signature on file for me is an electronic one from a touch interface. A few times I have had to resubmit fresh copies when the first ones were rejected.
Sometimes I wonder if true reason behind them is not any sort of verification but to maybe increase potential punishment if caught... So effectively nothing...
I remember the fuss about that email. Yes thats a good point, our concept of privacy has evolved a lot since then. Privacy as a technical and political theme changed a lot post-2000. To my mind, Wikileaks in 2006 and Snowden in 2013 were big turning points, with Snowden essentially confirming that mass snooping was a reality (as many people had supposed, but then it became inarguable). Also on the social side, there's a much better understanding now of how damaging it can be for someone to suddenly go viral (e.g. star wars kid, etc).
I guess technically that'd be Arthur rather than RISC OS.
My high school had a particularly well connected compsci teacher who managed to get his hands on one of the first Archimedes to be sold (using his own money it must be said ...). At that stage it shipped with Arthur because, or so we were told, the "actual" OS was still in development. As it turned out, that OS was eventually cancelled and instead Arthur was upgraded (in practice ... replaced by) RISC OS.
I still have fond memories of playing the demo that would become Zarch (aka "Virus" on the Amiga/ST/Spectrum/etc.).
Yep, I think of Arthur as a sortof Beta for RiscOS
I had an Archimedes A305 which launched with Arthur, when I upgraded to Risc OS (which arrived on ROMs, if I remember correctly, you ordered the ROMs and then your local dealer would fit them onto the motherboard) it wasn't really _that_ different, everything I'd written continued to work, etc. Like it was a major upgrade but fundamentally the same "thing".
I had that same model, except I fitted the chips myself. The first time I’d really ever looked inside a computer and very exciting for me age 11. The old Arthur ROMs were a prize possession for quite some time afterwards.
I could come back to the "modernising RISC OS" piece and update, as things are now actually happening. Although I was pessimistic for its prospects, it's becoming reality.
I know of 2 main efforts...
* Merlin, an all-new OS in Rust, aiming for a very simplified modern design and backwards compatibility.
* The RISC OS Open team is rewriting it in C.
I also know of an effort involving running an Arm64 hypervisor and then running the current 32-bit RISC OS kernel in a whole-machine VM. I lack any tech details about it so far, though.
Incidentally I was reading the other day that in Europe kettles are much faster than USA ones (due to 240v domestic mains as opposed to 120v) and theres a small subculture of USA electricians fitting 240v supplies into their kitchen and then importing European kettles.
A lot of American kitchens have 20A sockets in them so you'd think that there'd be a market for kettles with 20A plugs that'd boil 33% faster than your standard 1500W kettle, but nobody will sell me one.
It's not even difficult; the power comes to our houses in NA and Japan and some other places /as/ 240v and ws just drop it down. Your stove/oven and (many but not all) dryers and heatpumps/central air systems likely are using them as we speak.
I've always been more than a little confused as to why we don't utilise this more and I know the answer but... I'd really like some instant hot water, y'know?
i mean i could... i technically own a house now but the two electricians i've spoken to thus far vehemently insisted it was impossible and then proceeded to get crabby at me when i provided evidence to the contrary and kept saying "ok but who wants that???" as if i had offended them and their ancestors.
Cultural. The reason is cultural and it's ridiculous. At this point I'm going to just do it myself and get someone to drop by and give my insurance company a thumbs up to assure them I'm not about to burn down the house I guess.
Its interesting to contrast that with OpenAI chatgpt 3.5 which was launched and then immediately available to pretty much anyone and everyone. Would OpenAI have launched it that way if they werent (as they were at that time) trying to be open? (I get they arent really open but they were at least trying to be then). I guess I'm saying if the first chatgpt 3.5 level LLM had been built by someone less open like facebook or MS would the whole thing have gone in a different direction? Chatgpt being available to everyone seemed to set the pattern for everything since. Was this inevitable? Was it the only way these LLMs could have progressed?
reply