And don't forget that Moses received the Ten Commandments on tablets, although it doesn't say whether he used iPads or something running Android.
And that Revelation 5/6 contain the original doomscroll.
Readit Newssho_hn commented on The staff ate it later en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The... · Posted by u/gyomu
sho_hn commented on Google Pixel 10 series review arstechnica.com/gadgets/2... · Posted by u/thunderbong
It sure can. I’m installing most of my stuff from F-Droid nowadays and I’m sure as hell confused why would anybody call this “sideloading”.
Maybe I'm just exhausted by the many times HN has told me I'm tilting at windmills refusing to call the Llamas of the world "open source".
sho_hn commented on Google Pixel 10 series review arstechnica.com/gadgets/2... · Posted by u/thunderbong
Why in the world I would buy a phone (any not just Google) that costs north of $800 is beyond me unless I want to signal my purchasing power. If utility is my metric and not outward signalling and flex, I find this worst deployment of my funds.
So called "budget" phones these days have OLED screens some even come with 120Hz displays (beyond me why someone would want that) and plenty of compute and memory.
You want camera, buy a camera. You want gaming, buy a console or gaming machine.
For me it was "want camera", and I chose the top SKU (P8 Pro) because I wanted maximum camera.
"Buy a camera" doesn't work because (a) I don't want to pocket two devices, (b) most point-and-shoot dedicated cameras that are actually better are more bulky, too, (c) even entry-level good digital cameras are >$500 (e.g. a ZV-1F or something), so even the combo with a midrange phone often comes out more expensive and (d) a seperate camera makes it really annoying to send photos anywhere on the go.
That said: I came away fairly unhappy with the Pixel 8 Pro camera, which my book has a too editorialized post-processing look that I simply don't like. In retrospect, I think I should have gone for the Xperia in that generation, which appears to have been the last phone with high-end smartphone camera gear that took neutral-looking shots. My S21, despite having a worse sensor and optics, took subjectively nicer photos.
I've now updated my definition of "maximum phone camera" to be more choosy ...
sho_hn commented on Google Pixel 10 series review arstechnica.com/gadgets/2... · Posted by u/thunderbong
If you are calling 'installing an app on your own phone without involvement of the vendor' 'sideloading' then you are complicit.
I like this point very much.
That the term "sideloading" has normalized treating this as a special case is a problem.
It's unlikely the terminology can be rolled back at this point, but occasionally reflecting on this is useful.
That is actually absurd. If they're insane enough to think the world is conspiring against them they wouldn't surrender that way.
No, it's not, because, again, it's not as binary as you think it is. There's plenty of people who have good times and psychotic episodes, and during the latter they can be not collected and organized enough to dismantle safety networks they put in place during good times for exactly that reason.
A feature like that definitely wouldn't help everyone, but it might help some. If it was sold as a blanket solution that would be indeed absurd however.
Would you inform your children they were being surveilled?
Yes, I think parental controls should generally be transparent to children.
That said: Let me be clear that I'm very happy I'm father to a two-year old and we have some time to figure out our "AI policy" still, and for the tech/services to improve. I don't envy parents to the 8+ crowd currently.
I think "not being sycophantic" is the lesser error in just about every scenario. You do more harm by reinforcing delusions than you could ever do with a dismissive attitude of "no, that sounds psychotic, you should get your head checked".
But a big part of the issue is that OpenAI wants user engagement - and "not being sycophantic" goes against that.
They knew feeding raw user feedback into the training process invites disaster. They knew damn well that it encourages sycophancy - even if they somehow didn't before the GPT-4o debacle, they sure knew afterwards. They even knew their initial GPT-5 mitigations were imperfect and in part just made the residual sycophancy more selective and subtle. They still caved to the pressure of "users don't like our update" and unrolled a lot of those mitigations.
"not being sycophantic" should also be an easy decision considering that OpenAI isn't ad-funded and doesn't need to directly optimize for session length/engagement.
Either people can manage themselves or they can't and the ones that can't probably need to be institutionalized for their and everyone else's safety.
In reality it's not that binary. Plenty of people can manage themselves, except during times when they can't, and then they need help.
It'd be a good start if services let you enter emergency contact info, making escalation opt-in.
> I know that no one wants to hear this, but ChatGPT should probably be listening for people in crisis and, well, maybe not calling the cops, but maybe if there is a crisis line in their jurisdiction? A suicide hotline or something?
Doesn't necessarily even need to call (particular in case of false positives) but there absolutely should be detection and a cutoff switch, where the chatbots just refuse to continue the conversation and then print out the hotline numbers (much like with reddit cares messages).
I'm generally not in favor of censorship or overly protective safeguards on LLMs, but maybe it's needed for hosted models/services that are available to the masses.
But before they get locked down more, we should try some legislation to limit how they can be marketed and sold. Stop letting OpenAI, etc. call the models "intelligent" for one. Make the disclaimers larger, not just small print in the chat window but an obvious modal that requires user agreement to dismiss - disclaim that it's a predictive engine, it is not intelligent, it WILL make mistakes, do not trust its output. Make it clear during the chat session over and over again, and then have a killswitch for certain paths.
I think a good first step would be if a ChatGPT user account could easily enter emergency contact information the system would notify in scenarios like this, making the escalation opt-in.
The moderation tech is already there, and if there's even a small amount of mentally ill who would fill this in on a good day and be saved by it on a bad day / during an episode, it'd be worth it.
I think we solidly left this view on mental health behind when we invented civilized society.