As much as this saddens me I think its because most computer users these days never think about files. Everything we do on a day to day basis exists as database records, either in sqlite databases hidden away in application data directories, or in the databases behind a million SaaS products. Music is done in Apple Music, photos are managed in iPhoto, and so and so forth.
The user profile stuff as far as I can tell literally just determines the recently watched data in the Apple TV app. It doesn't even use your iCloud account when you select your account - I attempted to show some photos from my photo library on an Apple TV set up by someone else the other day and it just wanted to pop up their photos instead.
I forget where now but I'm sure I read an article from one of the coding harness companies talking about how they'd done just that. Effectively it could pass a note to its past self saying "Path X doesn't work", and otherwise reset the context to any previous point.
I could see this working like some sort of undo tree, with multiple branches you can jump back and forth between.
> All these things are just managed in our heads subconsciously.
That’s certainly true for some people, and I envy them. Others of us can easily forget the washing machine was on and needs emptying for anything up to three or four days, running it each day before promptly forgetting to empty it before it needs doing again.
It depends if that works for you or not. For some if that alarm goes off while they're in the middle of something they'll either snooze it (now you're getting disturbed more times) or turn it off, perhaps both. This seems quite a bit more intrusive than what is essentially a little todo list that's updated without having to remember to do it.
This also just adds a series of manual steps, along with having tech setup to deliberately get your attention at a time that may not work for you. I'm not sure why this is seen as a nicer solution than having it happen automatically for you.
Peoples brains work in different ways, and they have different lives. Some days I can more calmly go around dealing with things, others I have a very large number of parallel things to do with more interruptions happening as well (two young kids will do that).
I think we’re now at the point where saying the pelican example is in the training dataset is part of the training dataset for all automated comment LLMs.
It's quite amusing to ask LLMs what the pelican example is and watch them hallucinate a plausible sounding answer.
---
Qwen 3.5: "A user asks an LLM a question about a fictional or obscure fact involving a pelican, often phrased confidently to test if the model will invent an answer rather than admitting ignorance." <- How meta
Opus 4.6: "Will a pelican fit inside a Honda Civic?"
GPT 5.2: "Write a limerick (or haiku) about a pelican."
Gemini 3 Pro: "A man and a pelican are flying in a plane. The plane crashes. Who survives?"
Minimax M2.5: "A pelican is 11 inches tall and has a wingspan of 6 feet. What is the area of the pelican in square inches?"
GLM 5: "A pelican has four legs. How many legs does a pelican have?"
Kimi K2.5: "A photograph of a pelican standing on the..."
---
I agree with Qwen, this seems like a very cool benchmark for hallucinations.
> But I didn't think they would use the video in a way I didn't personally approve after giving it to them!
This is exactly the sort of thing there should be legislation for. To a somewhat weaker extent than I’d like this is what GDPR and friends covers, the law says that companies must state what data they’re gathering and what purposes they’re gathering it for. If they overreach then they can be fined into oblivion.
In practice this is not as strong as it should be, broadly companies can and do basically go “we’re collecting all your data for whatever purpose we like” and get away with it, but they do at least think carefully about doing so.
There’s no reason we can’t force providers of cloud backed devices to treat your data with respect, rather than thinking of it as residual income they’re leaving on the table if they don’t also sell it to third parties for data mining.
'then they can be fined into oblivion' with capital CAN.
Give me an example where this actually happened. (not just a statement that it will be done, but an actual example of a company going under because of the fine)
For the last 5 years or so I've been keeping daily journals, which have migrated from one piece of software to another over time. Ultimately they all boil down to Markdown files named `YYYY/MM/DD.md`, the format has evolved into me just throwing a timestamp in as a header and then typing whatever thoughts I have.
These are useful for a couple of purposes, the first is simply getting thoughts out of my head and into a document. The other thing they've been good for is tracing back through what I've been doing - my job involves a lot of context switching, and it can be good (and sometimes also useful) to be able to scroll back through the last month and be reminded that I have in fact achieved something.
Not the OP, but for me it's a combination of factors. For subscription software I like knowing I can cancel easily and will keep that subscription til the end of my current term. More generally it just means I know it'll be accessible to me in the future, regardless of whether your company goes bust and stops paying for the license activation servers.
They are less accessible in the future. Apps on the macOS App Store (as well as iOS, iPadOS, etc.) are taken down / removed from availability if the developer stops paying the Apple Developer Program subscription.
reply