Must have been worth as much as toilet paper considering his history of bankruptcies. I would be highly suspect of every person involved in letting him earn a degree in anything.
Trump's greatest talent is in lying with a straight face, then finding explanations for the lies:
>Why the discrepancy? Perhaps this will give us an idea: Trump told Washington Post reporters that he counted the first three bankruptcies as just one.
His failed businesses include money printing machines aka casinos.
It's quite ironic they call it enhance security to tie their software to their cloud considering their cloud infrastructure is one of the most hacked of the big corpos. Data breaches happen all the damn time.
Something that doesn't happen much, if at all, with Google or Amazon.
Microsoft is one of the most incompetent and impotent corpo out there and considering how much critical infrastructure relies on their software it would do good for the world if the government intervened like they should have back in the antitrust lawsuit days.
Break them up. Separate the cloud, windows and office businesses. Make them stand on their own merits.
I say this as someone who has tried to switch away from google many times because I dislike google as a company : there is no better search engine out there. There hasn't been for as long as google has existed. Every time I make something like bing or yandex my default search engine I end up getting frustrated with a niche search and type google.com and after typing google.com too many times I get fed up and bring it back as default.
And the two competing search engines I mentioned are pretty much all there is. Other names like duckduckgo aren't real search engines, they are just a frontend for another search engine (DDG uses bing).
There just isn't many out there willing to front the bill for crawling and indexing the whole web.
People trying to explain away google's success solely from a marketing standpoint are arguing from bad faith.
Many banking apps will outright refuse to run on rooted devices, much less google-free forks.
There are ways around that but those ways are unreliable and could break at any given time -- I am not risking losing the ability to pay for things online just for the sake of running an android fork. (in my country, all the banks switched to requiring 2FA from their app if you make online purchases with your visa or mastercard)
I think banks requiring you to buy hardware you don't actually own (a blessed android phone) to run software you can't control (this banking app) so you can access money you worked to make is absolutely ridiculous and dystopian. Why do you allow a bank to do this to you?
I sincerely hope there is some alternative option in your country. In mine, I can still perform banking activity by going to a physical branch, by calling in, or by using the website with a physical 2FA token (i.e. not my phone). The bank keeps trying to get me to switch over to their app but I will continue to protest this until it's no longer possible to not use an app at which point I will likely switch banks.
Right, but if Google's Android becomes closed source and a well-funded FOSS fork becomes available, that changes the situation. If Samsung, Xiaomi, Motorola, HONOR, OPPO, etc. all agree to use a new FOSS fork as their base, well Google's new closed-source Android becomes irrelevant. Samsung alone is large enough to be able to maintain a fork of Android, and a large enough percentage of the smartphone market that whatever OS it's running will be supported by banking apps.
> Samsung alone is large enough to be able to maintain a fork of Android
Samsung would rather not - they threated this card once before, while negotiating for Google to get rid of Motorola, and their bluff got called. Samsung tried to prop up Tizen as an Android alternative. Samsung since closed a number of its US OS offices - why sacrifice profits when they have a cozy arrangement: Samsung & other Android partners will continue to get the Android previews before anyone else: open source or not.
I agree with you: they'd rather not. If Google's Android became closed source to the public, but Google gave Samsung and other OEMs the right to modify it (including a hard fork later on if they desired), then I agree with you that they'd almost certainly continue with Google's Android — they'd lose nothing and eliminate future competitors.
My comment was in part addressing the higher up comments in the thread stating OEMs couldn't do a hard fork. My thoughts are that they have the marketshare that if Google's terms were bad enough, they could. They'd love to take some of the Play Store revenue, but currently dropping the Play Store would tank hardware sales as competitors would keep it. But if Google's terms were to get bad enough that multiple OEMs wanted to hard fork, that calculation could change. I don't foresee Google ever putting forth that bad of terms though, in part because of the option to hard fork.
Samsung recently deprecated their built in SMS/texting app and put an advertisement to tell us to switch for Google Messages in their app. They threw in the towel and not only will not maintain an android fork, they don't even want to maintain their own apps anymore.
In my country one bank had a 2fa app. Then they backtracked on security, but kept policy: they included the 2fa in the regular bank app. Now you don't have to use 2fa if you are using the bank app, because the bank app generates its own authorization, in the same device (app) without user interaction!
Fake admiration off. We also don't have to use any 2fa when we access banking through the website. (works on FF on Android)
That is sad. I do not have a problem with my 2 banking apps and Revolut.
But I am running MicroG version of Lineage OS.
So no google, but still works. I think this is worth a try, considering how many adds you have to see on Android running full Google (which I have just one to be able to use Android Auto inside my car).
> website that can influence elections in major countries,
I think this sort of power transferred to twitter, with most of the users who haven't left facebook being boomers who keep reposting AI slop over and over and over.
The rare times I look at my facebook account, all I see is the older members of my family spamming AI garbage like shrimp jesus, "look at this nice dog sculpture I made out of wood" (that I didn't actually make), videos of random nonsense like dogs taking care of toddlers and behaving like humans etc.
FB has become AI slop no man's land.
I don't even understand how facebook continues to operate at this point.
Twitter is not the place where the masses are being influenced. Especially outside the US, as in most other countries Twitter barely found adoption outside of tech and journalist circles.
The majority of voting people (= old people) are still on Facebook. And besides Facebook, Meta also own Instagram. Meta is definitely the single company with the most encompassing political influence tool, should it choose to use it.
I think people still use FB because it given them something to feel better. In Twitter/X you see all kinds of bad things happening, but in FB they sign up for groups that send only the things they like to see (most of that being fake, anyway).
They didn't even consider doing this before. They still, as far as I know, haven't paid a dime for any book, or art beyond stock photography.
Lawsuit is still ongoing, if openai loses it might spell doom for legal production and usage of LLMs as a whole. There isn't enough open, free data out there to make state of the art AI.
> There isn't enough open, free data out there to make state of the art AI.
But there are models trained on legal content (like Wikipedia or StackOverflow). Also, no human needs to read millions of pirated books to become intelligent.
> But there are models trained on legal content (like Wikipedia or StackOverflow)
Literally all of them are trained on wikipedia and SO. But /none/ of them are /only/ trained on wikipedia and SO. They need much more than that.
> Also, no human needs to read millions of pirated books to become intelligent.
Obviously, LLM architectures that were inspired by GPT 2/3 are not learning like humans.
There has never been anything remotely good in the world of LLM that could have been said to have been trained on a moderate, more human scoped amount of data. They're all trained on trillions of tokens.
Models trained on less than 1T are experimental jokes that have no real use to provide.
You'll notice even so called "open data" LLMs like Olmo are, in fact, also trained on copyrighted data, datasets like Common Crawl claim fair use over anything that can be accessed from a web browser.
And then there's the whole notion of laundered data by training on synthetic data generated by another LLM. All the so-called "open" LLMs include a very significant amount of LLM-generated data. If you agree to the notion that LLMs trained on copyrighted work are a form of IP infringement and not fair use, then training on their output is just data laundering and doesn't fix the issue.
> If you agree to the notion that LLMs trained on copyrighted work are a form of IP infringement and not fair use, then training on their output is just data laundering and doesn't fix the issue.
It's fuzzy. I could imagine a situation where a primary LLM trained on copyrighted material is a big hazard and can't be released, but carefully monitored and filtered output could be declared copyright-safe, and then used to make a copyright-safe secondary LLM.
I am certainly NOT expressing racial animus and take offense at the suggestion. My point is that a near peer competitive nation that has party political officers embedded into tech companies is the largest rival to domestic companies. I for one would prefer to live in a world where the winning "AI" companies are based in democracies and not in autocracies.
>because that inevitably implies dismantling that trust to get there.
There is nothing to dismantle because it's already gone.
The society that elected Donald Trump on his current program is an exceedingly low trust society. The whole point backed by DOGE is that you can't trust government and must reduce it to the most basic, barebones function. A lot of the current silicon valley elite fell prey to the nonsense preached by people like Curtis Yarvin who preach forms of anarcho-capitalism and despise democracy.
Inventory commingling ruined any respect I had for them. They've done that for a long time but I still am beyond pissed by the trend they started of being a front for third party sellers, all French retailers copied them (darty, fnac, cdiscount etc) and searching for products sold by trustworthy entities on the internet is now a nightmare.
Everyone imitates the market leader so it really feels as if competition doesn't exist as an alternative to amazon here. They're all as bad, and sometimes worse.
> I really hope you’re not thinking about spending less time on-screen.
Your sarcastic tone reminds me of a Steve Jobs interview.
> In 2010, a New York Times reporter had a conversation that revealed a lot about the life of the founder of Apple. Nick Bilton commented, “Your kids must love the iPad, right?” After the launch of the device. Jobs replied, “They haven't used it. We limit the amount of technology our children use at home. "
Yeah, they know what it is that they are doing to the world. And they do not care, profits > humanity.
Must have been worth as much as toilet paper considering his history of bankruptcies. I would be highly suspect of every person involved in letting him earn a degree in anything.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2016/live-updates/ge...
Trump's greatest talent is in lying with a straight face, then finding explanations for the lies:
>Why the discrepancy? Perhaps this will give us an idea: Trump told Washington Post reporters that he counted the first three bankruptcies as just one.
His failed businesses include money printing machines aka casinos.