Ferrari clearly aren’t doing it to save costs. I don’t think they’re doing it for principled driver-centered reasons, either, but more because the market expects it. Cars are appliances, and appliances are generally built to be sold (i.e., to look good) rather than to be used. Microwaves, washers, cars — the same for all of them.
The design exterior looks glued together from more interesting electric cars, so no surprise the interior does too.
EDIT: I just learned that Jony Ive did the interior. Further proof that without Steve Jobs goading him, Ive is just a stylist.
> Examples: we still can’t manage playlists of albums, or down signal genres of music or even artists, or separate “calm” music for sleep from all the other generative playlist rankings they use.
Youtube music thinks "videogame music" is a genre and lumps them all together, if you make the mistake of including even one song from a game OST any recommendations go out the window.
For example, a "chill" mix with videogame music in it will happily start including Doom Eternal tracks because "they're the same thing, right?"
YouTube music’s recommendations suck hard compared to Spotify and all the people I know who use it (a dozen) say the same thing. The only reason any of us use it seems to be because we only want to pay for one music service and we all use YouTube premium anyways. It’s amazing how big a hole that is in the service, that everyone I know agrees with the same thing.
I gave up on recommendations and I just playlist my own music preferences over time. Like in the days of old.
All the shots at the name apart I think this is a very good strategic move. The other frontier labs would die to have this level of surface available for their models as a testing ground, with the current state of things on Apple side the ChatGPT on MacOS integration is probably the best everyone will get for a good time on how a full integration of LLM model with OS could really looks like.
Agents will need a different level of understanding of your activities across different surfaces to act effectively, IMHO the OS is the perfect place to offer it.
The quality of apps in the Google Play Store has dropped massively. There are still some gems, but for better or worse, the ecosystem is simply not as strong as Apples and it's certainly not comparable to just having a device where you can install anything you'd like in a full desktop grade OS.
Most of the issues are around code hygiene rather than just LLM code being bad. You're creating code 10x faster, but you're also writing unit tests 10x faster, not just that but integration tests, CICD workflows, prod monitoring, product and engineering documentation, etc. It was already the way to get good code quality before, nowadays I think it's just reckless to generate code that's not backed by 100% test coverage and pass all lints and static checks configured.
This is it, people are acting like bad code wasn’t written before. My wife and I were full on laughing about it in bed the other night of all the absolutely horrible code we’ve seen written and how people actually think LLMs are worse than that.
The quality gates are up to you, and if you are smart you will make a lot of them and review them closely
It's the 3rd or 4th of threads like this in the front page and it's still not clear to me what are the alternatives that privacy advocates vouch for? Dead internet theory is happening, you have botnets with more budget than most of the third world countries and you could also add openclaw usage to same bucket. There's a real need for a protocol or specification for how to attest that an action was really done by a human and that human can be proven to be the one the service provider think they are. I don't think cryptography by itself would solve that right now.
> Dead internet theory is happening, you have botnets with more budget than most of the third world countries and you could also add openclaw usage to same bucket.
So what's the actual issue here? That on HN and Reddit and Instagram and X there'll be a lot of bots? As if they haven't been overrun by human astroturfers/etc for ages. Even ignoring that, what's the biggest issue you see with that, and why is it so big that it's fine to just enable a monopoly?
Your presumption that there has to be an alternative is flawed. Maybe there is none. You're saying there's a real need, great. There's also a real need for sexual assault to be completely eliminated worldwide. I think everyone would agree with the that need is far bigger than bots on social networks. Doesn't mean we should just jail everyone just in case.
You're manufacturing a need here as so important that by definition the ends justify the means. They don't.
LLMs fail at laser-focused troubleshooting, but they excel at brute-force breadth. Priming an agent to list 50 distinct possible causes for a database connection failure and investigate each one of them works better than hoping it guesses the exact root cause.
The main take away from this article for me is that battle scars can be used to unbog these agents. That explains the current productivity divide we're seeing, seniors use their past experience to unbog agents. Juniors naturally frame the problem into the brute-force breadth approach. The problem then is focused on Mid-career devs that get the worst results because they are naturals on framing the problem on brute force way so they try to force agents through rigid logic without deep experience.
I don’t think mid career devs are inherently worse, if anything, they’re in the best position to adapt. The real skill shift isn’t “prompt better” vs “think harder”. Rather, it’s knowing when to explore vs when to cut the tree down.
The interesting thing about religions as a whole is that the timespan is so big that you can really see how the backbone of the narrative stays the same while the fanbase and how they pick winners changes a lot, the Vatican state itself is a theocratic state created by an agreement between the pope and the Mussolini.
And if you wanna go back even further just remember that while Europe and christian countries were living in the dark ages the Islamic world was the one driving forward scientific knowledge and the exchange of ideas with the East. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age
I think the main issue is treating LLM as a unrestrained black box, there's a reason nobody outside tech trust so blindly on LLMs.
The only way to make LLMs useful for now is to restrain their hallucinations as much as possible with evals, and these evals need to be very clear about what are the goal you're optimizing for.
See karpathy's work on the autoresearch agent and how it carry experiments, it might be useful for what you're doing.
We were working on translations for Arabic and in the spec it said to use "Arabic numerals" for numbers. Our PM said that "according to ChatGPT that means we need to use Arabic script numbers, not Arabic numerals".
It took a lot of back-and-forths with her to convince her that the numbers she uses every day are "Arabic numerals". Even the author of the spec could barely convince her -- it took a meeting with the Arabic translators (several different ones) to finally do it. Think about that for a minute. People won't believe subject matter experts over an LLM.
Honestly I think we're just becoming more aware of this way of thinking. It's certainly exacerbated it now that everyone has "an expert" in their pocket.
It's no different than conspiracy theorists. We saw a lot more with the rise in access to the internet. Not because they didn't put in work to find answers to their questions, but because they don't know how to properly evaluate things and because they think that if they're wrong then it's a (very) bad thing.
But the same thing happens with tons of topics, and it's way more socially acceptable. Look how everyone has strong opinions on topics like climate, rockets, nuclear, immigration, and all that. The problem isn't having opinions or thoughts, but the strength of them compared to the level of expertise. How many people think they're experts after a few YouTube videos or just reading the intro to the wiki page?
Your PM is no different. The only difference is the things they believed in, not the way they formed beliefs. But they still had strong feelings about something they didn't know much about. It became "their expert" vs "your expert" rather than "oh, thanks for letting me know". And that's the underlying problem. It's terrifying to see how common it is. But I think it also leads to a (partial) solution. At least a first step. But then again, domain experts typically have strong self doubt. It's a feature, not a bug, but I'm not sure how many people are willing to be comfortable with being uncomfortable
In my experience, people outside of tech have nearly limitless faith in AI, to the point that when it clashes with traditional sources of truth, people start to question them rather than the LLM.
