That reaction has happened with every model release for the past few years. Maybe they aren’t the same people, but it’s always “old model was terrible, new model gets it right” then “new model was terrible, newer model gets it right,” ad infinitum.
GP said there is no rule yet, so the answer is “today, yes.” If you’re asking about the future, the answer is “to be determined.” But I think you knew that.
Pardon my ignorance, what is GP? If you have other sources please share, I only read this article, which bluntly states "Your current vehicle stays surveillance-free, but shopping for a 2027 model means accepting this digital copilot.".
GP=Grandparent.. the comment above the comment on yours.. but there is none.. so I guess we can assume article? There are better ways to phrase like "the article" or even "OP" (Original Poster - assuming poster & author are the same). This isn't a reputable domain though, so probably time to move on.
‘US District Judge James “Jeb” Boasberg wrote in the new opinion that a “mountain of evidence suggests that the Government served these subpoenas on the Board to pressure its Chair into voting for lower interest rates or resigning.”’
Unless you mean it’s sad that we’re in this position to begin with, in which case I agree, but that ship sailed the moment people chose to re-elect Trump. (And arguably, when Democrats chose to stay home rather than vote for Hillary, just because they were pissed about Bernie. A tragedy of letting perfect be the enemy of good that Democratic voters are all too prone to.)
Pet peeve: this post misunderstands “TDD.” What it really describes is acceptance tests.
TDD is a tool for working in small steps, so you get continuous feedback on your work as you go, and so you can refine your design based on how easy it is to use in practice. It’s “red green refactor repeat”, and each step is only a handful of lines of code.
TDD is not “write the tests, then write the code.” It’s “write the tests while writing the code, using the tests to help guide the process.”
> TDD is a tool for working in small steps, so you get continuous feedback on your work as you go, and so you can refine your design based on how easy it is to use in practice.
I would like to emphasize that feedback includes being alerted to breaking something you previously had working in a seemly unrelated/impossible way.
I have to second the complaints about LLM writing. The tropes were grating, to the point where I hit the back button before ever learning what the difference between a boid and a noid is.
Ecto, I see that you’re reading and responding to comments. In your own words, concisely, and assuming I know what what boids are: what sets this apart?
You sure about that answer? Variants of boids have been implemented to leverage the GPU many times. I'm unclear how far typical GPU based examples deviate but then yours doesn't precisely imitate the original either. GPU accelerated boids is even one of the sample programs provided for testing Dawn when you compile it. [0]
Aside from "look ma, machine learning!" I noticed exactly one thing that sets your implementation aside from any other example I've seen before. It seems quite odd to me that you didn't select either neural networks or that feature for this answer.
Also the performance analysis section contains several questionable claims.
Companies that require sales calls are built around selling large numbers of licenses to companies with at least a hundred people—which is still a “small business.” They’re much more interested in selling to mid-market or enterprise.
They have sales departments, processes, and incentives geared around selling to those businesses. Because of those systems, it costs them a lot of money to sell to tiny businesses, and those businesses cost them more in support, too.
They’ll take your money, but they don’t really want you, and they’re not going to change things to suit you, because—to them—your entire market segment is more hassle than it’s worth.
Solar + battery is a miracle technology that’s being installed at an enormous rate. Technically, it’s fusion power, capturing energy from a fusion plant 8 light-minutes away. :-D
This is a correct observation. The question is whether it’s meaningful to pursue local coherence when locality is vague. E.g. can someone at that level just declare permanent residence in a place but maintain their lifestyle in another? At country level they cover that with tax residence, I am not sure whether that’s the case between states in the US. Even as such, people who get on their plane as frequently as I get in my car are not subject to the same residence considerations.
This kinda misses the larger point. How are billionaires created? By the structure of the capitalist firm. The capitalist gets all of the wealth created by the organization and unilaterally can decide what to do with it, running the organization as a dictator. That is the bug. "Billionaire" is simply the most obvious and egregious form.
The class interest of the billionaire capitalist is the same as the class interest of the millionaire capitalist is the same as the class interest of the small business owner. Unless all of the capitalists leave, the capitalist class will still control the entire economy of California.
reply