Wow that's a lot of assumptions baked into one sentence.

62+25 = 87%

> The chip is made using Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.’s 5-nanometer technique, Waymo said.

It's great to see alternatives to NVIDIA chips coming up, but this really highlights the underlying bottleneck that is TSMC's dominance in the manufacturing of these devices.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49376544

Points: 3

# Comments: 2

The bigger problem is law enforcement's use of private business as end-around to dodge 4th amendment.

Google and Apple, Verizon and AT&T, auto manufacturers, Flock, and every other business that scoops up our data has a trove of information that would be unquestionably illegal for law enforcement to collect directly due to 4th amendment protections against government mass surveillance. So, instead, the businesses conduct the mass surveillance and then law enforcement gets to access that information -- either with a warrant as is the case for Google and Apple, or with some sort agreement as with Flock.

Businesses (or individuals) that deliver surveillance data to the government, compelled by warrant or otherwise, should be subject to the same constitutional restrictions as the government itself.

> No one expected doorbell cameras to join a mass surveillance network

Doorbell cameras were at least for individual security, initially. There's no attempt being made to market Flock as anything but mass surveillance. Surely we all expect them or their successors to be detecting peoples' faces, walking gates, and who-knows-what-else in the near future.

Nothing in your provided definition of capitalism precludes government control of money supply, taxation, regulation, or even government contracts.

Private ownership still owns capital goods and private decision is the primary driver of investment, prices, production and distribution in most industries. This is why we have a hard time with things that are obviously good for society as a whole, like renewable energy, efficient transportation, and low-cost housing, that don't have a competitive short-term return on investment.

We've seen the shakedown of Anthropic out in the open. It's reasonable to assume that Sam Altman has seen it as well.

First, people need transportation, not cars. For the vast majority of people, if you truly need a car, it's because your infrastructure was built in a way that doesn't provide any other modes of transportation.

Second, mass shootings aren't the intended effect of guns in the same way pedestrian fatalities aren't the intended effect of cars. Both cars and guns are providing some perceived value (personal transportation freedom and self-defense/safeguard against tyranny/national defense) with a significant number of deaths as a tradeoff.

Third, implying someone with a BAC over the legal limit for DRIVING is somehow responsible for getting killed while WALKING instead of driving is comical and darkly ironic considering drunk driving accounts for almost a third of traffic deaths in the US [1].

1. https://www.cdc.gov/impaired-driving/facts/index.html#:~:tex...

On the medical front, that's quite a strawman. I doubt you'll find much of anyone opposed to using cars for medical and emergency services.

It's entirely possible that models could be "dangerous" to fully release to the general public without guardrails and at the same time the government majorly overreacted in this case.

Releasing Mythos to selected researchers and companies at least gives those researchers a head start at addressing vulnerabilities before the model hits mainstream.

Valid point, but it suggests a mathematician who understands the math behind AI is more capable of grasping its trajectory, which is probably not the case.

People who are deep in the inner workings of this stuff day in and day out are the only ones who have a chance at having any real insight.

Is this a troll? What could an application do with Flash in 2005 that we can't do with a modern web application today (excluding the obvious answer of runtime vulnerabilities that allowed apps to escape the sandbox)?

Businesses can lose a lot traffic by not being present on Facebook and Instagram, so being unjustifiably banned is doing measurable financial harm in many cases.

Even as an individual it can be a huge pain to not have Facebook. The local individual sales market (e.g. classified ads) is dominated by Facebook Marketplace now, for example, and not having access to that market makes it difficult to sell things.

Meta has a responsibility to the community because of their position as the de facto platform for many activities. They've even intentionally positioned themselves to dominate. Having laws requiring them to act responsibly is totally justifiable.

My anecdotal experience is my Facebook account was compromised several years ago after TOTP 2FA was disabled. Didn't exactly give me a warm fuzzy about Facebook security policies at the time, and this new attack just reaffirms that.

I recently hit the same wall trying to directly my garage door opener's API (MyQ).

I'd be amazed if Google enabling this behavior doesn't violate some EU competition laws.