Back in the 2000s MS agreed to port Office and Internet Explorer to the Mac. This was a good move for both companies. Bill Gates appeared on screen during an Apple Conference to talk with Steve. Huge boos. Steve had to work the crowd back from the ledge.
Then Office and IE were ported. It was so weird running Word on a Mac. It was a good port too. They did a good job of embracing Mac UI ideas. I found the Mac Word better than Win Word.
I was kind of new to the Mac back then.
I imagine Apple donated a bunch of early OS 10 machines to MS for development. I wonder if the MS Mac Dev team was a pariah at MS.
Word was originally released for the Mac in 1985, so the deal was not that Office would be ported, just that MS would keep developing Office for the Mac.
Exactly. It's a strange form of whataboutism, mixed with learned helplessness, to imply that having sucked for decades, we can't avoid sucking even more now.
You can explain that to the Ukrainians and tell them how they shouldn't have American technical superiority like Starlink and the American AI and data in their drones to survive another day.
Deeply sickening that modern society is such that we have to make room in our brains for objectively outlandish connections like these. That a children's cartoon and game about cute little companions has to in any way be involved in the same sentence as the flattening of a city and genocide is just... pure insanity. The world has truly, collectively, lost its fucking mind.
> What time you have in mind, that was really better?
Don't think there's ever been a time in human history that would qualify as good, but I will take better: any time pre-COVID. We have completely gone off the rails since the pandemic.
Yes, maybe not the right place anyway. I agree that Covid initiated a accelerated downward spiral, but for me the turning point was already 9/11 and everything that followed.
You can connect any two things into a sentence regardless of the state of the world. This is way off of where the problems actually are.
Edit: Some people have downvoted this without giving a reason, but I'm going to double down. Any time you have disasters or large crimes, you can connect them to children and children's things. Thinking there's anything to learn about the specific fact that you can make that connection is a mistake. It's letting the real problem spill over in a way that misleads your common sense. It's an inherent part of bad things happening that they also affect children. No matter what state the world is in.
It's silly to compare an arbitrary connection to a non-arbitrary connection and as if it makes the former arbitrary. You're doubling down on a category error.
It's bizarre to me that you aren't acknowledging the context these remarks were made in, I don't understand where you're coming from at all. Like, you've seen what article this thread is discussing right...?
The even more immediate context for this chain of comments is the article being pretty far off base, and that the people treating those videos like a database of location info are getting it completely wrong.
Also drones didn't flatten a city. You really have to ignore a lot of the details to make this connection strong.
> Any time you have disasters or large crimes, you can connect them to children and children's things.
This time you have an actual connection, the state of the world notwithstanding. If you factor in the world however, with this many wars, I'd say it's pretty much linked, regardless of the way you assembled words to make it look like it doesn't, and doubling down doesn't make it less distant from reality.
It's linked, but it's always linked the same amount whether the world is doing well or doing poorly. It doesn't tell you anything about the state of the world to note that these situations exist. What tells you about the state of the world is how common they are.
Imagine someone seeing that the murder rate is not zero and using that to claim the world is worse than it used to be. That's not how it works, despite murder obviously being a bad thing.
The controversy elsewhere in these comments is over whether it’s recording, and the server is slurping up, the video footage, during AR mode. We know they do so on the “scans” they have you do, where you walk around something taking video, but I don’t think there’s proof that having AR on = uploading to the server. Should be easy to prove one way or the other by observing bandwidth usage.
Yep, the autocracies of the past only resolved when the ruling machinery needed something from the population. They needed farmers, workers, soldiers, etc.
There are clear parallels in the modern world of societies when the ruling machinery doesn't need those things from their population - petrostates. The people in these states tend to be viewed as subjects, not citizens. That's where we are headed
A corporate council of emperor kings with armies of pacification bots. The tiny sliver of window we have to ensure this doesn't happen is rapidly closing and there seems to be no movement toward ensuring that this doesn't culminate with the entire power of this new revolution in the hands of a small class of near demigods.
Hopefully they will let us live comfortably like pets as sterile creatures that will slowly die out and not be replaced. This could limit human misery in the future.
No, because they are different things for different purposes.
Visual navigation is prone to degradation. Keeping the "map" updated requires constant visits. (I know because my team worked on the patent for a method for updating said maps.)
Also Pacification bot would be run by the military who most lilkey have GPS.
Finally, For ground based bots, SLAM is actually more useful, rather than pre-built map based navigation.
If you want to kill some redacted that are sitting in a trench inside the killzone but don't want to risk your own life, the ground drone with a machine gun (remote operated as of now) goes there. It was April this year when the news were saying a position was taken over by remote drones alone. With news being Ukrainian propaganda you can of course take it with a grain of salt, but it's probably at least somewhat true.
Ground drones however are targeted by the FPV drones (wired or radio controlled), so the new thing is to have a thing with automatic targeting to shoot those. Then again, I at least heard about using something open-cv (yes, some of those run actual linux) shaped on the FPV drone itself, as it really helps with the amount of jamming going on.
I thought that was still human-in-the-loop? The drone's onboard computing identifies a potential target from a distance such that EW isn't effective, the human confirms it, and the drone moves in closer to attack. At this point jamming doesn't matter because the drone already has its orders.
The last piece I heard was talking about no human in the loop for anti-drone turrets because it hinges on sub second reaction time which human operator can not deliver.
With drones themselves receiving targeting it's different so at least for some time it will have the operator in the loop. But if the operator again becomes the bottleneck due to operator to drone ratio (drone production doubles every N months, while conscription ... lets just say doesnt), it will go out of the window really fast. It will also more consistently target specific body parts to juice that wounded to killed ratio.
An assumption that there is some distance from which you still see the **, but don't get affected by jamming is not the strongest one too.
“We just launch it and we know everything will be dead – everything that will be found there in this particular area will be dead,” says Kokhanovskyy. “There is no connection to the drone at all, you cannot see the video, nothing… Everything it sees will be killed.”
Because there are never any civilians caught in the middle of two warring armies, right? I think the ICC will be getting real busy soon.
That alone doesn't cut war crime definition to get attention to ICC and isn't really different from the usual aerial bombing. You drop the bomb from a plane or 100 of them somewhere around the densely populated area and don't know who they kill, as there is no connection to the drone.
Civilians dying in an armed conflict doesn't cut the definition of warcrime by itself. Deliberate targeting and intentional destruction of civil infrastructure that supports life or something like it is.
Then of course there is stuff that ICC isn't getting busy about which is clearly above the threshold -- the regular drone safaris in and around Kherson (city with pre-war population circa quarter million people) happening for the last few years.
A war crime's a war crime. Doesn't matter if the Ukrainians did it, or the Russians, or Palestinians or Israelis. Or The UN or USA or NATO or Canadians. The only time a war crime's not a war crime is if it's a terrorist group doing it, because then it's terrorism instead of a war crime.
"Terrorism” and "war crimes” are overlapping categories, and being done by something independently defined as a “terrorist group” isn’t what defines something as “terrorism”, rather doing terrorism is what makes a group a terrorist group.
The real cyberpunk dystopia is going to be a lot less glamorous than it is in the stories- mostly just unending poverty, war, and death for the vast majority of us.
Dunno - if you look at the graphs https://ourworldindata.org/democracy the long term trend over a couple of centuries has been towards democracy, though with a bit of a reversion over the last 15 years or so. A lot of the bad has come out of Russia which is struggling a bit these days.
The doers can't remove the bureaucracy-focused people, because doing so would run counter to Pournelle's Iron Law; it's like crossing the streams. Let's instead replace bureaucrats with AI, since the same pressures that drive bureaucracies toward self-preservation might instead push AI systems toward AGI .
The law doesn’t define behavior. It describes behaviors.
Those behaviors can change by giving the doers more power. If a bureaucrat is trouble, and the doers can cause the bureaucrat to be fired, to doers will have more power.
All you're arguing is that it's easier to memorize primary and simple secondary colors in RGB. No question, it is. Once you've got one of those detent colors locked in, how do you vary it? What does it mean to bring up i% of the first channel, j% of the second, and k% of the third? That's the problem HSV solves.
reply