carlosdp

that's not a video render of a hypothetical device, that's a real video of the real working device, fwiw

Congrats on launch! really cool product

What evidence do you have that the webview "opens in the background"? I just tried it, and it definitely isn't preloaded when I click a link...

Pure vision will never be enough because it does not contain information about the physical feedback like pressure and touch, or the strength required to perform a task.

I'm not sure that's necessarily true for a lot of tasks.

A good way to measure this in your head is this:

"If you were given remote control of two robot arms, and just one camera to look through, how many different tasks do you think you could complete successfully?"

When you start thinking about it, you realize there are a lot of things you could do with just the arms and one camera, because you as a human have really good intuition about the world.

It therefore follows that robots should be able to learn with just RGB images too! Counterexamples would be things like grabbing an egg without crushing, perhaps. Though I suspect that could also be done with just vision.

I love uv, not just for local development, but it also makes it WAY easier to manage python environments you setup for running python workers / user code in the cloud.

I was just telling someone about the story of how he invented bitmapping for overlapping windows in the first Mac GUI in like two weeks, largely because he mis-remembered that being already a feature in the Xerox PARC demo and was convinced it was already possible.

RIP to a legend

I highly recommend starting with the SO-ARM101 and the LeRobot tutorial. They're super cheap, its insanely quick to get started, and you can even buy pre-made kits like at https://partabot.com . It's the "Hello World" of robotics now, imo.

Don't bother with a Jetson Nano, you don't need that to get started, and by the time you need that you'll know a lot already. You can just drive the robot from your laptop!

Getting to training your own VLA fine-tuned model is a super quick and easy process. You can see examples of other people completing the tutorial and uploading their training/evaluation datasets here (shameless plug for my thing): https://app.destroyrobots.com

I wouldn't bother much with ROS at first tbh. It'll bog you down, and startups are moving toward using other approaches that are more developer friendly, like Rust-based embedded.

You can go far with a robot connected to USB though!

There's an experimental "multi" mode you can input multiple images to

Wow, this is incredible work! Blown away at how well the audio/video matches up, and the dialogue is better sounding / on-par with dedicated voice models.

The article ignores Firefox switched the contract to Yahoo as the default search provider from 2014-2017

I worked at Mozilla when this deal was struck. The deal with Yahoo did require Yahoo be the default for Firefox, I'm not sure what you mean by "absence of any requirement"?

Mozilla broke that contract with Yahoo (there was a clause allowing them to do so without repercussion and keep the money, if they deemed it better for the users, wild contract) less than 3 years later because users hated Yahoo so much, and went back to Google.

Google is dominant because it just _is_ the best search engine.

One of the biggest differences between Google selling Chrome and any old chromium fork is precisely that the "other" browsers no longer have to try to compete with Google's own browser to get users to monetize.

Isn't that literally anti-competitive? The DoJ is saying Google search is dominant partially because of Chrome pushing users to Google.

You're saying Chrome is dominant because users like it too much, and other browsers can't compete? Tough, that's the users' choice, though.

Awesome! I'm super impressed with SVRaster, glad to see others already playing with it too

The article is a neat read! The design of the blog itself is even more interesting. I don't love the right-aligned way it starts, but I love the inline activations of the left popup! So cool

Ok first of all,

There's a trend on social media where many repeat Andrej Karpathy's words: "give in to the vibes, embrace exponentials, and forget that the code even exists." This belief — like many flawed takes humanity holds — comes from laziness, inexperience, and self-deluding imagination.

I'm going to go ahead and give the author the benefit of the doubt that they aren't literally saying Andrej Karpathy is "lazy and inexperienced", because that claim is obviously absurd.

In general though, I think the author is missing the actual point Karpathy was making! Let's look at his detailed criticisms for the typescript agent run, for example:

Regularly clones TypeScript interfaces instead of exporting the original and importing it.

Reinvents components all the time with the same structure without searching the code base for an existing copy of that component.

These are only problems for human codebases. You're not vibing if you are expecting agents to write code the way humans would.

Duplicating interfaces and implementations is inefficient, and would be a nightmare, in a human codebase. But, the code will still work! So if an AI agent is managing the codebase, who cares if it duplicates things all the time?

Maybe it'll see that it did that later and decide to consolidate things, maybe it won't. It doesn't affect the actual outcome of the code, unless you actually look at the code as a human, which is not "vibe coding."

When told to fix styles with precise details, it will alter the wrong component entirely.

When told specifically where there are many duplicated components and instructed to refactor, will only refactor the first instance of that component in the file instead of all instances in all files.

When told to refactor code, fails to search for the breaks it caused even when told to do so.

You're thinking about the code again, gotta stop doing that if you actually want to ~vibe code~. Refactoring code isn't a thing when you're vibe coding, English is your programming language now, the Typescript (or w/e language) is the assembly. You wouldn't spend much time observing the assembly output of your compiler (especially for web dev), so why are you observing the code output of your agent?

If you don't want to vibe code, that's fine, nobody is forcing you to. But if you're going to do it, grade it on the metric that Andrej was actually claiming: that you can get working results on a lot of software projects today by telling coding agents to make some code do something, and then just keep running it with "fix this bug" until it works, and it'll often get to a working result.

He never claimed that the code outputted would be beautiful, from a human perspective, or well formatted, or well architected, or efficient.

You knocked it out of the park with the cover! I'll definitely be grabbing a physical copy because of that.

That's not a one-to-one analogy. The LLM isn't giving you the book, its giving you information it learned from the book.

The analogous scenario is "Can I read a book and publish a blog post with all the information in that book, in my own words?", and under US copyright law, the answer is: Yes.

I'll take that bet, easily.

There's absolutely no way that we're not going to see a massive reduction in the need for "humans writing code" moving forward, given how good LLMs are getting at writing code.

That doesn't mean people won't need devs! I think there's a real case where increased capabilities from LLMs leads to bigger demand for people that know how to direct the tools effectively, of which most would probably be devs. But thinking we're going back to humans "writing readable, functional, maintainable code" in two years is cope.

At some point there might be massive layoffs due to ostensibly competent AI labor coming onto the scene, perhaps because OpenAI will start heavily propagandizing that these mass layoffs must happen. It will be an overreaction/mistake. The companies that act on that will crash and burn, and will be outcompeted by companies that didn't do the stupid.

Um... I don't think companies are going to perform mass layoffs because "OpenAI said they must happen". If that were to happen it'd be because they are genuinely able to automate a ton of jobs using LLMs, which would be a bull case (not for AGI necessarily, but for the increased usefulness of LLMs)

I was looking for this the other day, looks great!

I don't think this is a bad thing. Pretty much all of the author's examples of "new and potentially superior technologies" are really just different flavors of developer UX for doing the same things you could do with the "old" libraries/technologies.

In a world where AI is writing the code, who cares what libraries it is using? I don't really have to touch the code that much, I just need it to work. That's the future we're headed for, at lightning speed.

Went through the Twilio IPO, I can give feedback based on my experience. IANAL and all that.

1. I've never heard of that from a tech company IPO. Twilio did sell-to-cover fwiw.

2. Does your RSU contract/letter say something about that? I'd maybe check with a lawyer and see if they can even do that. I would have imagined that in this scenario, the company gives you the RSUs and leaves you to figure out paying the IRS yourself.

3. That sounds absurd, I never had to do that. Tech companies that reach IPO typically have an HR department that handles all this for you, but I mean yours clearly doesn't I guess. I don't know what, if any, obligation employers actually have legally in this regard. Again, I'd check with a lawyer.

4. Hmm, I was a current employee during my IPO experience, so don't know how former employees were handled. I'm guessing though that they were also given sell-to-cover option. I'm pretty sure the stock broker the company used (I think it was ETrade) just handled all that for the company, including showing us how much was sold to cover as things vested, and locking current employees during quiet periods.

Good luck, hope that helps a bit in terms of at least validating your sanity that this probably isn't normal.

That's not algorithmic bias, that's a large delta in content quality.

Videos coming out of the Harris camps were milquetoast in comparison to the Trump camp. Of course those videos get more attention, from people that like him and hate him, and therefore get pushed more by the algorithm.

Repeal the Jones act, get a commercial shipbuilding market going again domestically.

In the meantime, leverage the best asset we have: alliances with western nations. South Korea is really good at shipbuilding, to the point they are now authorized to repair US Navy warships based in the PACCOM AOR. Let them build ships for us too.

It says at the bottom it's from Sahil Bloom (@SahilBloom)

They’d rather give Sam Altman $200 per month for access to the world’s most mediocre researcher than get good results from a human.

Really going to need a citation for the claim that Deep Research is the world's "most mediocre researcher", the product was launched like 12 hours ago...

I'd buy it's not the best researcher in the world, but I'm willing to bet a lot that it's very far from the worst human researcher. I'd wager it's well above average.

Idk, this article assumes that the company before the recent changes reflected his beliefs of how companies should be run. But the way I see it, it's pretty clear he disagreed with a lot of it, and just felt too much pressure (internal from employees, external from the media) to not fall in line.

Does no one remember that in the 2010s, Zuck went around trying to advocate against the calls for censoring "disinformation", arguing free speech shouldn't be regulated by a company? These types of views aren't new for him, they were aggressively suppressed by the press which published thousands of articles calling his ideas anything from "reckless" to "violent."[1][2]

At some point, he gave in, in part because the new administration very much agreed with the media on this (and again, many of Meta's employees). But now he has the political cover to run things the way he actually wants to, which we can see from his public remarks years ago.

So, you can I guess call him a "coward," but it would be misinformed, in my opinion, to claim he's a coward because he's seemingly kowtowing to the Trump people in the changes he's making. On the contrary, if anything he was a being a coward before by not following through on his true convictions!

(fwiw, I don't agree any of this is cowardice. It's extremely difficult to run a company at that scale and try to keep everyone happy, and he's only human at the end of the day. The author simply disagrees with his currently expressed opinions. If he agreed, she might be calling him a hero, though probably not. I also think laying the NIH stuff at his feet is a huge non-sequitor. Zuck has nothing to do with any of that, idk what she's expecting he's supposed to do about it?)

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/18/mark-zuckerberg-georgetown-s... [2] https://www.google.com/search?q=mark+zuckerberg+tour+talking...

Here are some things I struggle with at age 32:

- Social awkwardness and anxiety

- Difficulty in forming IRL friendships

- Impatience with the idea of connecting on a meaningful level with other people: who needs ‘em?

- An abiding sense of detachment from reality

I'm the same age and have the same things, and I went to traditional school K through university. Idk if that has much to do with how you were schooled, or at least not being home schooled doesn't just magically fix that.

It's an ad only you can see, I don't see the harm.

What were the privacy concerns of yesterday that we don’t need to worry about today?

The web/internet is a hell of a lot more private today than 10 years ago. Third party cookies are basically gone, mobile tracking is going out the door with Apple leading that charge, there are tons of relatively popular browsers and extensions that reduce tracking even more, there's enough privacy legislation that big companies have had to re-architect to preserve privacy as much as possible by default.

Hell, if we're just talking about Meta, they literally nuked a thriving third-party developer API ecosystem to appease people's privacy concerns, out right.

No, because that would be sharing your photo and not unique to you as a user. I also don't really see why anyone would want to do that...

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but this is kinda cool! As long as the user data doesn't leave the Meta ecosystem (no reason to think it does right now, the ad in question here is from Meta itself), it's not a privacy concern since only you are being shown those unique ads with you in them.

Even if other advertisers start using the system, as long as the generated resulting images are never shared with the advertisers and are unique to each user, its just a futuristic way to help you "imagine" what having XYZ product would be like, which is what most ads strive to do.

People have knee-jerk reactions to anything to do with ads because of the privacy concerns of yesterday, understandably. But if you actually step back and think about this, there's no reduction in privacy that I can see. If people are creeped out by it, I think they should maybe let people disable them with a setting.

But in general, making ads more effective without giving advertisers more data about us is a great thing for the continuation of free amazing internet services!

There are certainly some good points about some statements Carr has made that seem to be pushing at the limits of what the FCC actually has purview over, but the contention that Carr is "the most direct and sustained threat to the First Amendment and the freedom of the press any of us will ever experience" is on its face absurd to anyone that follows Carr's work.

Even the examples in this article fail to come close to making this case. In each one, he's advocating for more speech, for increased access to publishing platforms. No ordinary person would possibly see that as "censorship." He's not seeking to eliminate "speech he dislikes" by making statements against NewsGuard's heavy involvement in social media "disinformation" moderation, he's making the point that moderation on political speech has been unfairly applied in many cases, and that's largely the fault of activist groups that push social networks to censor speech they don't like (and label "disinformation").

The article starts out by accusing the Trump camp of projection, by lauding Carr as a champion of free speech. It's ironic that the author is guilty of that very thing (projecting) by accusing Carr of being not only pro-censorship, but the biggest threat to free speech in the country? Where have you been for the past 15 years? Come on