All you need is a virtual filesystem of some sort, a way to download, a way to upload, an editor, a compiler, and a VT100 JS library. We already have WASI for the rest.
If the JS is too undesired, then perhaps go the old framebuffer graphics mode (e.g. a region of the WASM memory that is interpreted as an ASCII screen, or maybe even as a full bitmap buffer). Then JavaScript side just needs to forward keyboard/mouse into memory and that screen region out of memory.
WASIX already does all the other stuff you mentioned, including in the browser. The one thing it's missing is GUI, mainly because there's no standard GUI interface in POSIX.
A pet peeve of mine is when projects get named after proper nouns from fiction for no reason. A holocron is essentially an encrypted book where you need the force to decrypt it. How does that relate to leader elections? It doesn't, it's just being twee
I was about to disagree, then I remembered how annoying I find switching between DEs and remembering the weird names they give the various utilities, especially when want to know the process name and the about window just says "File Manager".
My bet for the real reason for this is that it has been widely reported that Twitter artificially boosts Elon's account specifically. Many people noticed when they did this that his posts showed up in their feeds despite them not following his account. I bet this led to a massive wave of people blocking his account (it's as easy to block as it is to mute). And this population of users eventually got big enough for him to notice, and he wants his posts in everyone's feeds again.
Elon is not getting an artificial boost. The people reporting about Elon's posts being artificially boosted either don't know how X's features work or they are engagement-farming for clicks.
X has two user feeds controlled by tabs at the top of the screen. The "For You" feed is the algorithm recommending high engagement posts to you. This is mostly accounts you follow but it's also highly interacted with posts. Love him or hate him, Elon's posts get massive engagement so naturally it gets recommended a lot.
Even if you have never personally engaged Elon's account, if the algorithm sees the people you follow have engaged with a post, it will be put into your "For You" feed. Same is true of posts from any user. This is not something specific to Elon.
The other feed, the "Following" tab contains content from only the people you follow. The "Following" feed is also chronological which is super nice and a rarity in today's algorithm driven social media world.
So if you're seeing random posts, chances are you're reading the algorithm feed, not your Following feed.
That's false, Elon Musk is a "topic of interest" on Twitter, and he is added by default to all Twitter accounts. To remove the tweets boosted by Elon Musk's algorithm, I had to click "Not interested" and then "Not interested in the topic Elon Musk," knowing that the other topics are all much more general (politics, technology, sports, news, entertainment...).
Idk he has at least three alts (the weird baby role play one, Adrian Dittmann, DogeDesigner). Though maybe the people who have blocked him who he wants to see also know to block those to be fair
I'm sorry but the fix that they did over the air is bullshit.
From the article:
"The problem first became apparent to Tesla in March of this year after complaints about unintended hood opening from Chinese customers. By April, it had identified the problem as deformation of the hood latch switch, "which could prevent the customer from being notified about an open hood state."
[...]
Although the problem is with the hood latch, as with many Tesla safety recalls, the problem can be fixed with an over-the-air software patch. The new software is able to detect if the hood is open and, if so, will display a warning to the driver to alert them to stop their vehicle and secure the hood."
All they did was add a pop up to tell you to stop once the hood has flipped up, the underlying issue with the hood latch is mechanical and unfixed. By all rights this should be a full physical recall.
The hood could come unlatched while driving and having your hood flip up (or the driver stopping quickly if they notice it starting to) at 70 mph can cause an accident.
How is this any different from any other car? If you only partially close your hood the most you get is an alarm inside the car telling you should really close your hood completely.
I am not a fanboy of LLMs or genAI but how is this a great test litmus test for their usefulness? How many humans on earth could do that today? Ten thousand at the most?
I don’t need an “AI” to help me with something widely discussed, I can simply read the docs. On the other hand I’d love a tool that opens me niche topics in a reliable way.
Not the OP but I believe they are referring to the idea that if longevity research causes lifetime extension to be possible, then some folks think they can then avoid age-based death entirely. I think that the crux of the argument is that once we find "THE reason" why we age and if we can halt/end that process then we have beaten senescence.
I personally think this view is too simplistic about how our bodies work and overly optimistic that we a) won't hit other limiting factors that aren't hit today by ~100 and b) that interventions to stop senescence won't have unexpected side effects.
I forget where I’ve read it (I feel like slatestarcodex or gwern or one of those folks) but basically our bodies are constantly fighting megaloviruses (various forms of herpes) and we’d inevitably lose the battle if we lived to 120 or so.
Good point. I wonder if Amazon is experimenting with this with the idea that they will be able to make more "eye grabbing" thumbnails with genAI as opposed to pure stills from the given film. The click through rate may be a key metric internally, and since prime video is an add-on to prime the risk of customers dropping the service over this is low (compared to if Netflix did this)
It's funny, the root of the idea is that Agile allows teams to change how they are doing things midstream so we can constantly improve. But I have never met a scrum master or PM who has both the authority and the desire to advocate for changing how work is done. So all it ends up being in practice is a series of rituals that people sleepwalk through.
Dilbert captured it best: "Our boss can't judge the quality of our work, but he knows when it's late". For everybody doing programming work, there are ten people tasked with making sure it's done by the "due date", whether there's any value in that due date or not.
Do we actually think this way though? When I am talking with someone I am cognating about what information and emotion I want to impart to the person / thinking about how they are perceiving me and the sentence construction flows from these intents. Only the sentence construction is even analogous to token generation, and even then, we edit our sentences in our heads all the time before or while talking. Instead of just a constant forward stream of tokens from the LLM.
reply