So there's one photo. Of one family. Now what about millions of photos of all the other families possibly affected by him? That doesn't have power?
It's like "hey you can say mean things about me but don't attack my family while I attack yours". Not that this is directed at him personally, but it's just this mindset of wealthy people..
> Now what about millions of photos of all the other families possibly affected by him?
His name allegedly isn't even clear on his own! Ongoing lawsuit brought by his sister. (Amended as recently as a week ago and discussed in a flagged submission here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47640048 ).
I think he's just trying to remind people that someone can both be a CEO of a powerful company you might disagree with/hate as well as a real human with a husband and child and that trying to set fire to his house could kill those people.
I personally wouldn't go as far as to say the Farrow article caused this but it seems fair game to respond to an article that had an over the top cover image of an animated Sam Altan picking and choosing faces with a photo reminding people he's human like everyone else.
I don't know who you think the "real family" is but a) narrowing what a real family is does an awful disservice to a whole host of unique families, not just families that involve surrogacy and b) nearly all surrogacies in the US are gestational surrogacies where at least one parent is genetically related to the child and the surrogate is not at all related to the child (not that genetic relations is what makes something a real family or not, but I'm pretty sure thats what is implied here).
Thanks to obsession over KPI and metrics in general, we can no longer trust big tech corporations. It seems they've forgotten WHY you actually want to play fair, they can no longer be trusted.
We need to teach non-technical people that in this reality, a scam might come directly from the real seemingly "reputable" company.
I don't expect prices for RAM or SSD to get cheaper anytime soon. From what I've seen, production capacity has been bought out for a couple years already.
Datacenter capex decreasing means that the chips have to go somewhere else, so it doesn't matter too much that the fab capacity has been spoken for, if the demand side is slacking prices will decrease.
Sure, but they have competitors who'll be more than happy to pick up whatever OpenAI ultimately doesn't buy. Point being, from POV of suppliers, there's no reason to re-retool for consumer production.
It has been good enough for long time. CXMT has long made DRAM and NAND modules that are just as good as anyone else's, sometimes for half the price. The only thing they can't match is flagship products of Samsung.
However because of that, prices for Chinese-made DDR5 have risen in China (and globally) along with the prices of all others, just with a slight delay.
BTW it seems they forgot about the part that defense uses of the model also need to be safeguarded from people. Because what if a bad person from a bad country tries to defend against peaceful attacks from a good country like the US? That would be a tragedy, so we need to limit defensive capabilities too.
> On the global stage, state-sponsored attacks from actors like China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia have threatened to compromise the infrastructure that underpins both civilian life and military readiness.
Yeah, makes sense. Those countries are bad because they execute state-sponsored cyber attacks, the US and Israel on the other hand are good, they only execute state-sponsored defense.
We even have smartcards with e-ink displays and I'd personally want them to succeed here instead of moving security-critical apps to smartphones..
Because Google then abuses its position to inject unremovable spyware with elevated privileges into the phone which the user then can't defent against without making the phone "unsecure" and thus unsuitable for these apps.
If these apps really need a smartphone, I'd at least want it to be free of ad-related garbage in the system. I'm fine with not being able to flash a custom ROM on the smartcard as it doesn't contain hostile software.
Now if even Apple starts showing ads, there's no other choice but to restist this..
Sports already exclude most people as they're not performant enough. So I don't see a problem with excluding biological males from female sports.
But, we should compare actual body parts that are relevant, for example I'm male but I'd not belong in male sports as my body is more feminine..
Still, it's not who you think you are that should decide, it's the body type so the competition can be more interesting as that is the point of sports anyway..
It's like "hey you can say mean things about me but don't attack my family while I attack yours". Not that this is directed at him personally, but it's just this mindset of wealthy people..
reply