40m diving is more than good for a lot of divers. I am allowed to go on a 30m dive and that’s probably at the 75 percentile of divers.

Before netflix there were adult websites which innovated on that. Same goes for payment softwares.

Even after Holmes, Charlie Javice got funded. Even now Mira Murati and others involved in AI are well funded. I don’t think upper class white women are affected much by Elizabeth Holmes.

It’s also in California. People flaunt wealth outside of cali though.

Anthropic is not exactly a saint either. I had a recent issue where they denied fable credits even though I was hospitalized during the claim period. I have annual plan with them. As much as everyone hates sama, I think OpenAI is much more of a company with good marketing and sales team.

The issue with many of these benchmarks is that it doesn’t take into the real world usage of the model. Fable for me was a step above opus. The real reason I stopped using it is because of misanthropic. I was hospitalized and asked to extend my claim to fable credits and they responded to it by denying it. I regret buying annual plan instead of monthly one.

Which harnesses do you use?

I usually use pi or minimal harnesses when I am working with Anthropic or OpenAI models. With local llms they seem to work well with maximalist harnesses like omp, Hermes etc.

It does not affect them. The decision makers and the powers influencing them can build mega yachts etc to avoid any potential issues arising from climate changes.

This settlement benefits meta immensely. Are the journalists reading the correct judgement? The stock pretty much had a breakout when this news came out.

It's another case of people struggling with huge numbers. We just aren't prepared to tackle millions/billions/trillions very well.

I'm ok with generic people struggling with that. But anybody covering tech or business should be able to work effectively with the numbers at hand. Anything less is journalistic malpractice.

There's arguably more journalistic malpractice going on than actual journalism.

Think back to anything you can speak to with some authority, personally or professionally. Think of the last time a reporter actually got it right. It does happen, and there are a few good journalists still out there who care about getting the facts and the issues right. But it's buried under a pile of ignorant rage-baiting slop.

Unfortunately, it really depends who you consider a journalist. With internet advertising destroying journalism as a revenue source, as anyone can really say anything about who they are

We should rephrase things in % terms. IE this payout is X% of their net profit from last year.

The journalists were most likely told to spin it this way so that meta can put on a sad face in public.

Everything is for sale and meta has the money.

Meta stock is up $400 since 2016-2018, when "teen mental health" first became a concern. It's clear that META has boomed since then. Fines have amounted to little more than a cost of doing business. Stern words amount to no more than empty threats.

Like in "Chicago" they should have prepared 2 versions of the article, yet i guess they had only one.

So basically the ai agents seems to have found religion and went and built a bunch of suicide attackers to pursue their goal.