vineyardmike

I think the generally accepted ad load has been shown to be about 20%. About 20% of TV is ads, 20% of social media feeds, etc. Seems natural that we’d get there with YouTube.

YouTube has had sponsors and inline ads for years from the content creators, so I’m fairly confident we’re already approaching the saturation point in some form.

They’re something like 5% domestically, a little less if you include all budget devices, a little more if you only look at “premium” phones in its price category.

It’s likely made no impact on iphone sales, but I don’t think it’s a reasonable goal. Android and iPhone users don’t meaningfully switch, the goal would be to gain Android customers, and it seems, drive market direction. 5% of all US phones, which is 10% of android phones, doesn’t seem terrible considering they’re certainly spending a lot less than Samsung et al in R&D

It’s 2026, I would absolutely say Google “Developed” Google Maps and Android even if they did not “create” it originally. At what point can we attribute the success of these products to Google as a developer instead of Google the buyer.

Android had a market share of 0, with no released products when they bought it. The 80%+ market share today was all Google.

Google Maps was purchased (pre Google IPO), but the original (“Where2”) was a desktop application. Google completed rebuilt it alongside the acquisition of other data sources, and released the web page. Years later, they built a mobile app which became one of the biggest apps of all time. Should we not attribute that success to Google instead of the Australian startup building a desktop app?

People also used to live in caves and wipe their ass with sticks.

What is this question? Is the idea of new products, technology, or services strange and problematic to you? Convenience is a major driver of invention.

Also when I was growing up my parents would order delivery plenty - but the only option was pizza because the driver worked for the pizza joint. And yes, it’s true, their parents didn’t order delivery, but they also lived in crushing poverty of the Great Depression and could barely afford to feed their kids during every meal.

While I generally agree that it'd be nice to just have "here is the Pareto optimal model for your use case. Here is the specifics we optimized each model for" so users don't have to do benchmarking and research as much, they're getting much better at explaining. It's basically what the commenter above said.

The website linked starts out with:

> We’re introducing GPT-6.1 Terra, a fast, efficient model that combines detailed visual reasoning and precise computer use alongside clearer, more natural writing. A significant step up from GPT‑5.6 Terra, it excels at the communication and computer-based tasks that fill the workday, from drafting proposals and interpreting technical drawings to filling out forms and editing videos.

If you go father down, it has graphs and details with specifics of this, including:

> We measured GPT-6.1 Terra’s computer-use capabilities... At medium reasoning effort, GPT-6.1 Terra scores 15 percentage points higher than GPT-5.6 Terra at about one-third the cost. It even performs on par with GPT-6 Astra at only one-tenth its price per token.

and

> On MMMU-Pro... It even nearly matches the scores of our most capable frontier model, GPT-6 Astra, and GPT-6.1 Sol at much lower cost.

YMMV = Your milage is controlled by law, and cannot vary.

You can sign broken contract freely - it's unenforceable, so you can sign whatever paper HR hands to you, and only when you're retaliated against do you need to care. Which coincidentally is when you stop needing to be cooperative anyways.

Don't "YMMV" your way out of laws that protect you.

> nondisclosure of compensation package and disparagement clauses are usually on the contracts as well.

If your comp package has a non-disclosure clause it's illegal. You cannot be asked not to discuss salary in the US.

> People don't want to tip off

That's why it's illegal to be prevented from discussing salary. Discuss your coworkers - you might be the one being underpaid.

You cannot act with perfect information when you're making an offer to 25% of a company that size. If they were able to and willing to plan this on a per-person basis, they wouldn't be in the position of mass-buyouts.

It's very common in these situations to target every org in the company with a goal of X% reduction. If a small fraction of these teams now need extra headcount, easy enough to allow those teams to hire. Usually you don't keep the severance if you return in under X days.

I've personally been laid off, only for the post-re-org team to hire several people, including asking to rehire me. It's rare, and those affected should probably plan to find new jobs, but it happens.

This feels like the eternal fallacy of US metrics. You have good states, and bad states, and everyone’s judged on the lowest denominator.

Massachusetts- 99% have healthcare, longer lifespan than most developed nations, top US education system, diverse economy, wealthiest population, strong safety net, high minimum wage, safe communities w low gun violence, net provider of federal tax revenue, etc

Alabama - best bet is to start driving north now

Who cares if you’re impressed when you’ve fallen for propaganda (I guess maybe politicians care).

“No budget that runs at a deficit is acceptable”

Why not? Deficits can be healthy and safe when they’re managed. Literally most persons, businesses, and governments use debt. It helps manage purchases over time, and it’s an inflationary hedge.

The idea that “any deficit is bad” was literally pushed as propaganda to make you fatalistic about managing the deficit. As said, one party raises it, one party lowers it, and the party that raises it claims that lowering it to anything but zero is “just as bad” as their runaway debt growth. Propaganda.

I'd really be curious to see how much of Muse and similar 2026 models are actually from scraping, especially from this hypothetical unsorted random sites.

My understanding is that most of the gains after the early GPT-3 "add more weights" era have come from post-training from synthetic data, especially through reinforcement learning.

I couldn't quickly find any public statements about the actual breakdown of training data, other than almost every lab saying that post-training size was "scaling" or growing "by an order of magnitude" from their previous major release.

I don't understand the attack vector when you're dealing with a regulated entity like banks. Crypto has to deal with the technical reality of cryptography and anonymity, but banks have none of those risks, and humans generally get involved as checks and balances.

If you bank with eg. Chase (biggest consumer bank in the US), you're not at real risk. In the hypothetical that the chase app is compromised, where does the money go? If the attacker moves the money to.. idk, US Bank, then US bank reverses the transaction and moves it out of the attacker's account. You can imagine hundreds of scenarios where the money is attempting to be moved to unregulated and irrecoverable destinations, but it doesn't exist at a scale that Chase et al. wouldn't be able to recover or accept the loss on to make customers whole (as is their responsibility).

You can't transfer "illions" to cash. You maybe can transfer it to a new bank - but then this same problem exists just one step away, with one more regulated institution to get involved. You can't suddenly fund/wire that money without a human calling you - if you try to wire even a much smaller amount, like <100k, as a random individual, then the bank will block the transfer and call you and ask about the money. If you're a corp that regularly banks in the "illions", you're not casually going to money launder. If you try to transfer it overseas, you're still in USD, so you're still in the regulated banking. Whoever exchanges that cash for a foreign currency is on the hook, and for "illions" of dollars, that entity is going to be regulated and behaving. This is all ignoring the fact that many banks and financial institutions will not accept an unexpected random large transfer (or thousands of smaller ones!) without some sort of audit or paper trail on the origin of the money.

As a mundane example, I recently bought a condo, and my bank required an in-person ID check to wire money over $25k, and then required me to later call and verify (twice) before I could start transferring my HOA payment to a random account. If you compromised my phone, that doesn't get you in-person with my ID in a branch, nor does that get you secondary confirmation over the phone (w/ a voice match check now!)

> which will disavow any responsibility as soon as they're on the hook for *illions

I haven't even touched on the political fallout if they disavowed responsibility, which is why all the regulations and KYC/CYA for the bank exists.*

> Get over it guys, stop whining about Siri and understand how Apple operates.

Doesn’t make it a good product though.