It's a terrible bind. Patients want a pill to fix things, but if they know it's just a sugar pill, it doesn't work. It has to have active ingredients that might work. That's why there's little desire to change the status quo on antidepressants much. Anyone who reads the medical literature knows they're statistically underwhelming, but the experienced reality is that they help people a lot.

Talking therapies, CBT, exercise are all good alternatives but they take time and effort that a depressed person might not be able to manage. An antidepressant prescription they can get in 15 minutes.

The rest of the 21st century is going to be really messed up.

The reborn Nokia/HMD was also doing multi-sensor image stacking back in 2019 on the Nokia 9 Pureview.

Is there the same motivation to help people live healthy lifestyles in the American healthcare system? Are there any lobby groups with the kind of influence and reach as a universal healthcare provider?

They're just less efficient and more likely to break. In a commercial environment that's worth it to show off the contents, but the trade off is different in a domestic setting.

And, through the US exercising extraterritorial jurisdiction, businesses in Europe doing business with the US might not be able to use it either, for fear of reprisals. Even though the model is Chinese and hosted in Europe.

This sort of thing happens all the time, especially in the finance and defence sectors.

Case in point: GrapheneOS (or any other custom Android distro) is unlikely to be able to ever pass remote attestation, even a signed, secure boot build with the bootloader relocked, because it's not the original OS for the hardware.

Same goes for any desktop Linux.

In a world of deeply untrustworthy Big Tech, and trend of governments, banks and other basic services needed to exist in society relying on apps and in the future, websites that use remote attestation, that is very troubling.

There are better ways of dealing with the bad actors problem, but Big Tech has chosen violence.

Developing theory of mind is one of the key milestones in child development.

Ultimately this isn't really solvable without a way of marking audio with a verifiable signature that it was produced by a specific human, with some kind of reputation algorithm.

Also the AI boom means NVIDIA et al. can afford to buy TSMC's best processes at scale, which means less available capacity for Apple.

I'm sure given no other forces at work, Apple would prefer to stick with what they were doing previously, buying the lion's share of TSMC's best process.

The real advantage is knowing exactly what Apple is launching months or years in advance, because that can inform strategic planning.

It's being the tech lead of a team of junior to mid level developers. You design roughly what the solution should look like, split it into reasonable sized tasks so they don't go off the deep end, advise them on some of the details, then assign them the tasks and let them get on with it, keeping an eye on what they're doing, reviewing their output, and course correcting them when they go wrong.

Just like with a team of humans, you have to use your judgement as to how much supervision they need individually and how large a task you can give them without them going off the rails.

I've tried, and I feel like I've got closer with faster models, but ultimately the agentic loop excludes you. Even if you're asking the agent to do simple short tasks, it's still: prompt, wait, wait, wait, check, and you never really feel like you're the one in control.

The problem with faster models is also that they're more stupid, so that additionally breaks your flow when you have to fix something dumb it's done.

LLM-powered autocomplete is a bit more like it, but that tends to be either so dumb as to be a net negative, or slow enough to be useless. And autocomplete is pretty distracting for me.

I feel like I'm missing a mode that works more like a pair programmer. Perhaps a multimodal model that can talk to you about what you're writing, as you write it, and offer suggestions rather than trying to take over and do everything for you.

Surely if that's the case then when you move your finger to the upper left then the pointer should move to the bottom right. Because that's how it would work if it was a real object and you were pushing the pointer around with your finger. Why is scrolling a special case?

Honestly though, I wouldn't mind that much if Apple hadn't decided to call it "natural" scrolling, like you're weird if you prefer up for scroll up and down for scroll down. It's both smug and reeks of the same kinda of discriminatory attitude that made life hard for left handers.

I use a local LLM with it, but you can use a hosted LLM if you like.

The core home automation stuff can run on a potato. The LLM just writes new automations when I ask it, or acts as a natural language interface.

I use a pretty small 4B parameter local LLM, on a fairly modest mini PC. It doesn't take a frontier model to do that kind of work.

Remove the fuel elements, reprocess what's useful, and store the reprocessed materials and nuclear waste somewhere "temporarily" that isn't really suitable for long-term storage.

Remove intermediate and low level waste from site and also store it "temporarily".

Remove any non-contaminated plant and sell for scrap.

Punt the main part of the problem (scrapping the main reactors and reactor buildings) down the road for a hundred years or so until radiation levels are acceptable for demolition to proceed.

Re-use other parts of the site for projects that can use the existing HV connection, like another reactor, or battery storage.

That's essentially all you can do unless you want to risk a radiological accident.

There are a few things MacOS X inherited from classic MacOS that I don't think work that well in the modern world, and application-focused task switching is one of them. It made sense in the classic Mac context where many apps used floating windows for toolboxes and other non-document windows. You wanted to switch the whole application, with all of its windows, as a unit. It was also the right technical decision with classic MacOS's modest multitasking abilities.

But the world has since mostly standardised on SDI app design with tools contained within that window, and multiple windows representing different documents. In that context, the macOS app-then-window approach is more roundabout than pure window switching. You get used to it, but when you've got a lot of windows open, it's a small but ever-present drag on usability.

Alt-Tab is one of the first things I install on a new Mac. Hopefully one day Apple will give us a built-in option, much like they eventually did with window tiling and full-screen window zooming.

You can run x86 macOS VMs in Windows or Linux too with a little bit of technical trickery, but again, you end up with a license issue, so no-one reputable does it.