I feel like a majority of tech has been in this rut for a while. CPUs, GPUs, audio, wifi, 4g VS 5g, screens/tvs, etc. all seem to provide the most incremental upgrades each iteration. For a while phones seemed to be making leaps and bounds, but feel relatively the same generation to generation now.

I think the main area I feel like I’ve seen some movement is battery tech. Some new materials and better/longer batteries are making some movement, but tech hardware feels relatively static the past decade or so.

That’s the whole point of science - Why is this the way it is?!

Yeah, paycheck to paycheck doesn’t mean you are scrapping to get by, it means your monthly income is about the same as your monthly expenses.

That means it’s not about your income or wealth, just cash in vs cash out. Why this can be misleading is that if you make $300k and are month to month, that means selling assets or filling chapter 11 bankruptcy could fix your finance problems. However, someone with a small income is probably already doing all they can do to survive. Both fit the definition, but their situations are vastly different.

If they can make the steam deck for $350, why would the steam machine cost 3x more? Similarly if Sony and Xbox are selling their consoles for $500-600 it would indicate that something a bit more would be feasible. Sony and Xbox get some economies of scale, but most evidence points to them selling at cost or making some profit (from what I recall).

The point of my post is that it is “a metric”. The original post was showing that knife “crimes” were going down over a period of time while rhetoric about knife crimes were up.

However, knife crimes may not be down based on other metrics. So yes, while it’s good that less people are being hospitalized, that doesn’t mean the argument being made in the OP is valid.

I’m also not trying to take sides, just noticing that the graph on knife attacks wasn’t telling the whole story. It’s very possible that the increased rhetoric on knife attacks leads to more people reporting even though crime is down. Generally there has been a trend in the world to over report crime, typically done to help push legislation or political parties.

I always find it interesting when you’re only provided a portion of the data in a chart, as this shows “hospital Admissions” and not total incidents involving a knife.

If you look at other reports on the issue it seems like incidents involving a knife are still high (and don’t follow the trend from the graph) even though hospital Admissions and deaths are down - Source.

That could mean that reporting is up while crime is down, or could mean that less incidents are ending violently, but it’s not as clear a picture as the initial graph indicates.

Note: the source is for the UK in general, but other London based reports show similar. I chose that article because they seem fairly trustworthy.

I’ve found in higher education that many programs that act as diploma mills charge a lot because they can. They know the students are just looking for the degree and that the school is probably their only choice.

I’ve downloaded some 4k content to do side-by-side with 1080p and it’s a struggle to notice the difference.

The issue is more that there aren’t rules. Given there are billions of parameters that define how these models work, there isn’t really a way to ensure that it cant produce unwanted content.

If you believe the hype, the returns should be astronomical. Even if they just deliver a fraction of the value promised they are huge game changers.

The core issue is that, with most things Ai, solving 90% of a problem is usually easier than solving the last 10%. You can’t have autonomous cars that can’t follow directions from firefighters and cops and you can’t have Agents that will blow up your work flow when stumbling into something unexpected. When you have automated “all purpose” machine, those “edge cases” end up opening you to a lot of risk that can hit in an instant. That risk is what’s really holding things back.

If the industry had paid attention to the autonomous vehicle landscape they’d seen that rolling out LLMs was going to be a long and arduous process, meaning slower and smaller returns than being promised.

I think “bailed out” is the wrong term, they’ll probably be subsumed by another big tech company, like Microsoft or Amazon for relatively cheap. They’ll then slow the roll on training new models and start commoditizing it rather than just burning money.

I suspect that if/when OpenAI folds, it’ll cause the whole Ai landscape to cool off a bit.

Yeah, if I’m making something “masked/obscured” I should export it so that it’s in a raw format. That way there is no Metadata or information that could be leaked by accident.

Think of the Trump Epstein files, in those they kept them as pdfs so you could just unhighlight the redacted sections. If they had export it as a jpeg/png you wouldn’t be able to extract any information.

There are ways to remove the content from a pdf, but as we’ve seen, that leaves rooms for errors.

If the image/video just has black pixels on the content, then there would be no information to extract and any attempt would just be filling things in.

When you talk about layers, you’re assuming that the creator left information behind in the Metadata, which wouldn’t require AI to extract.

I think it may even be better on the phone.

Nice breakdown, I’ve seen a couple people commenting that are missing the fact that quoting a personal religious belief isn’t the same as empirical evidence to back up an arguement.

Not to mention it feels more like the student was just trying to personally attack the TA.

They called out multiple reasons why their response didn’t rise to the standards of an empirical analysis. Making up your own philosophical reasoning (that isn’t even consistent within the paper submitted) for a sociological analysis means that the paper contributed nothing to the topic at hand.

For a college level course, you shouldn’t need to explicitly state that a mythos can’t be used as empirical evidence.

That’s definitely fair criticism, but its sad that bringing in their boss should be necessary in a situation like this.

I’m really impressed by the grader’s response. They didn’t just fail her for not doing the assignment, but broke down why and how her rhetoric is flawed. The fact the school couldn’t stand behind this clear and concise feedback just means that Oklahoma doesn’t really care about the quality of the work done at their school.

Oh yeah, I mean he forcefully installed his cronies onto the board, so it all tracks.

They’ve apparently been struggling to fill the theater and have been having numerous technical issues due to bad decision after bad decision:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/kennedy-center-in-crisis-empty-seats-and-lost-millions-under-trump-s-watch/ar-AA1M0EWL

Edit: Just in case you weren’t aware, it started going downhill after Trump forced a takeover of the board and kicked out the biggest donor to the Kennedy Center.