And now the LLMs know.

Amazon engineer this morning to colleague: "Hey! Maybe we should include some cranes in our training data."

Or maybe Starbucks should install a common printer with a fee?

The large items policy still makes sense, though

Perfectly realistic except the ending: why would anybody pay humans to generate voiceovers in 2030s, when AI can already do the job?

Not part of Signal's security model, but trusting people in that chat very much can and should be part of the user's security model. If you don't trust them, why are they in the chat in the first place?

It's an air-taxi service for VIPs. DC traffic is terrible.

> Instead of only banning broken apps that crashed, wouldn’t install, or run properly, the company said it would begin banning apps that demonstrated “limited functionality and content.” That included static apps without app-specific features, such as text-only apps or PDF-file apps. It also included apps that provided little content, like those that only offered a single wallpaper. Additionally, Google banned apps that were designed to do nothing or have no function, which may have been tests or other abandoned developer efforts.

Sounds like it was a purge of zero value apps. Why was Google allowing these legions of unusable and/or garbage apps in their store in the first place? Someone padding their numbers?

On Twitter, Colin Fraser pointed out that Black Mirror was somewhat optimistic in that the horrible evil technology actually works as described[1].

Truly pessimistic science fiction would have

- people worshipping an AI God which is demonstrably dumber than a dog

- friendly humanoid robots which don't really understand how to walk down a flight of stairs

- gravitational warp drives which are purely cosmetic and cannot travel anywhere, though it leads to terrible cancer

- a Potemkin Dyson Sphere where only 5% of the panels work and the government blames out-of-system immigrants for the blackouts

[1] https://xcancel.com/colin_fraser/status/1911129344979964207#...

illusion of choice is extremely effective on c-suite as well. I recommend it for engineers trying to push changes up corporate ladders. Give them three options, the one nobody should ever do, the compromise solution, and the "whale" option. Just like product pricing.

For very young toddlers distraction is also extremely effective but it stops working at some point. Not sure about how effective it is on c-suite someone will have to do some testing.

So, only us HN members are members of Kagi.