paxys

Well yeah, they’ve literally been (illegally) ordered to do this.

Ads follow eyeballs. If people are spending time on ChatGPT then why won’t advertisers pay for ads over there?

It’s time to stop complaining about “shitty code” written by AI. If there are problems in functionality sure, but I personally don’t care about a good directory structure or short, single-purpose functions or short files or whatever else we have been taught about good engineering practices. Why? Because if the code was generated by AI then it will be maintained by AI. I’m not reading it, and I don’t care about it.

No, they said they don't use android so don't know the native UX. You can test your app on the platform and confirm that the functionality all works, but how well it adheres to the platform's design language is subjective and hard to say if you aren't used to the platform.

> Nobody wants this.

Sure, but a billion people presumably do want to keep using ChatGPT for free.

Messages are tailored for the audience. The "AI will replace all jobs" narrative is used to sell AI to business leaders.

And the “makes sense or not” part can change based on a bunch of factors.

It’s actually pretty common for a new company to start fully native (only iOS, few features, limited scope), then switch ro react native/electron (need to support more surfaces, features are being developed too quickly), then back to fully native (can afford individual dev teams for each platform).

Have tens of millions of engaged fans or just tens? Difficult choice.

It’s also hard to be the CEO of a multi-trillion dollar company. Speaking is part of the job.

Apple needs to bring back live keynotes instead of this overproduced TV show.

Just once I want the CEO to go up on stage and say “this year’s model isn’t all that great tbh”.

Willing to bet if an AI next cures a cancer people here will go “that wasn’t the most dangerous type of cancer so it is meaningless”.

Yeah solving a Millennium Problem is totally equivalent to calculating another digit of pi.

If I work at Anthropic and say there’s a 0% chance AI could kill all humans is BBC going to publish that as well? After all I am an “Anthropic researcher”, and my views should hold the same weight as this one.

Or are only the most sensationalist ones worth amplifying?

> Navier-Stokes is one of six “Millennium Problems” on a list compiled by the Clay Mathematics Institute in 2000.

Seven, not six. One is solved already, but is still a millennium problem.