TLDR: author bought a phone of eBay that was sold as unlocked, but wasn’t, and doesn’t want to use AT&T.

It’s also worth pointing out that a lot of current “art” is produced under similar constraints to AI art - for commercial purposes and with algorithmic feedback. It’s easy for people to think ‘this is just as good as a human’, when they are only comparing it to soulless corporate art in the first place.

What is that story supposed to mean?

I liked the cinematic synthwave track too - much better than what a lot of human creators do.

But… the fact that it can generate a pleasant electronica tune is essentially meaningless. This is no Miles Davis.

An LLM generated narrative cannot convey the emotions and experiences of the author. Nor can AI generated music.

My point was that the interpretation or 'feeling' you get, doesn't has to align with what Miles Davis thought to induce.

Therefore it doesn't really matter what Miles Davis was planing to do because if Miles Davis doesn't tell you exactly what he felt and thought you would feel about it, but you still enjoy the music, you don't need a Miles Davis as long as you enjoy the music

I guess you don’t understand the feature. This isn’t a VR avatar. It’s a representation used for collaborative apps.

This is super interesting. Does anyone know of any other web-of-trust style social networks?

If you haven’t used it recently, you really need to update your view.

What are you basing this on?

I bought and returned one.

It’s not an announcement, and the headline is a lie that has nothing to do with Apple.

Apple published an academic paper, as they have been doing for years, showing a model that objectively outperforms GPT-4 on one narrow test. Nowhere do they claim to outperform GPT-4 in general.

Assuming that this is somehow intended to manipulate the stock price is not a rational analysis of what is going on.

Also, Apple has operated on a predicable release schedule for a decade now. They have already said that they will be announcing their AI work at WWDC. It’s unclear what anyone is expecting them to do differently or why it would make any sense.

As for the stock price - the explanations as to why it’s depressed are twofold - one is regulatory action, and the other is frenzied investors who want to jump on the AI bandwagon.

Dropping sales in China is a headline like a stopped clock. Usually wrong, sometimes right, and we only find out which at earnings time.

Note that nobody’s AI product is doing great yet, so for the most part it’s all performative, something that Apple doesn’t engage in.

Also, unlike most other companies, Apple is really pushing for ML/AI on device. And while there are serious limitations for that, I really don't like to be beholden to opaque profit-at-all-costs companies like Google or OpenAI or...

The problem is that a bunch of companies who hate each other ‘competing’ doesn’t result in platform innovation. It results in stasis. Anyone who has spent any time in industry consortium meetings knows this, and it’s the reason Apple does everything themselves.

The EU should do things the way they want to, of course, but the rest of the world should wait to see what the outcome is. I can’t see anything good coming for consumers, not for smaller developers. A few larger players such as Epic might be able make a bit of money as an alternative middle-man, and a lot more people will stop being able to share their photos with their grandparents because they aren’t using the same app anymore.

It’s a tool the way cigarettes are a tool. Taking responsibility means cutting it out of your life.