If you want consistency, you only need to convince everyone to switch to a single font renderer (e.g. freetype). That won't happen, though, because OS font renderers have quirks that cause them to render the same things in subtly different ways, and users have come to unintentionally expect those quirks. Even if rendering is 'better' in one app.. if it doesn't match the others or what the user is used to.. then it won't 'feel native'.
Maybe if what freetype is pushing for (fonts are WASM binaries) continues to take hold, and encompass more of fonts, we'll find more consistency over time though
I think a better UX for average consumer would be more a side-swiping filter menu similar to that of social media mobile apps, with different non-math style names "default blur", "circle blur", etc. Especially as more people do not use desktop computers today.
Also maybe LLM integration so you can just explain what you want done, then it does it, instead of needing to follow some tutorial to learn the software
> Also maybe LLM integration so you can just explain what you want done, then it does it, instead of needing to follow some tutorial to learn the software
I like how this counts as a reasonable side remark today but would have been utterly delusional just a few years ago.
He wasn’t stupid. He’d observe their own developers and see how they rely on the terminal and command line for their work. He’d ask pointed questions and demand thoughtful answers.
Then he’d find a way to make it the #1 AI developer platform or distort reality until it is.
FPV today is largely using ExpressLRS[0], an open protocol for running FPV quads' control links (also using esp32 usually)
Video for FPV quads on the other hand is divided: some use analog (mostly because when you lose signal, it's a gradual loss rather than complete loss + a reconnection process), while others use 802.11-based communication which is actually quite competitive. Walksnail Goggles for example use 802.11 for their video links, although not super open/documented people do dig into how it works (see Chris Rosser's work.) Latency is good enough with such setups for fast-paced competitive quad racing, at least
I will add for those who haven't tried these, as it usually doesn't come across in verbal comparisons:
Digital FPV (like DJI's system) looks vastly better than analog. I think the best comparison is: Digital looks like a modern movie, youtube video etc, and analog looks like CCTV footage from the 80s.
I will also clarify on ELRS: It uses ESP32, but it is a thin wrapper around Semtech LoRa (~915Mhz and 2.4Ghz) SX128x and SX126x chips, which are doing the heavy lifting.
I heard people flying analog also use quite a bit more transmitter power than allowed for non-regulated devices to keep things manageable. Do you have any reference what's possible with digital when staying in the allowed regime?
The "allowed regime" also differs based on where you live. Iirc 25 mW is the maximum permitted power in Europe. Have to double check. That gives you about 100-500 meter range in an open area.
A big advantage with digital video in the US is that some systems, like DJI’s, have FCC approval and can go up to 1 or 2W EIRP legally, so the allowed regime is bigger (there are basically no FCC approved analog video systems, so really you need an amateur radio license and to operate under amateur radio rules for analog video in the US).
I think graceless degradation isn't an inherent property of digital radio. You definitely could have some kind of digital modulation that takes advantage of FEC etc. but gracefully degrades.
I'm sure it exists, there probably just not much market for it.
Almost all existing digital FPV systems gracefully degrade as much as they possibly can, both by using FEC and walking down a large number of available MCS as link quality gets worse (and reducing bitrate to match). But when they do eventually fail, re-sync is a much harder problem for them than it is for analog.
To a great extent you trade statefulness (inter-frame compression, FEC, HARQ, sounding parameters, overhead) for efficiency, so improving link recoverability comes at a cost. There is an existing solution which makes this trade - HDZero. It works amazingly at close range in clean RF environments and has good analog-esque falloff characteristics, but in terms of absolute efficiency it is very bad and therefore does not have the same quality or range as other solutions. Certainly a better hybrid approach is possible but to your point, niche.
(1) Doesn't match the situation at all, because the law didn't require the paper to shutdown - it required a foreign company to divest so that it is US-owned, and the paper could continue operations as normal.
That's a pretty substantial difference.
(2) Also doesn't match the situation, there is no requirement that TikTok restrict the reach or audience of their content in any way AFAIK.
(3) The situation is more akin to "foreign government owns the local library, and can decide based on the identity of the person walking in which books the person is allowed to see and check out" - seems obviously problematic at least /if they do that/
Meta's entire business model is to own users and their content.
Whether it be Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Messenger, WhatsApp, etc. their focus is to acquire users, keep them in their platforms, and own their content - because /human attention is fundamentally valuable/.
Meta owns 40% of the most popular social media platforms today, but their attention economies face great threats: YouTube, TikTok, Telegram, WeChat, and many more threaten to unseat them every year.
Most importantly, the quality of content on these platforms greatly influences their popularity. If Meta can accelerate AI development in all forms, then it means the content quality across all apps/platforms can be equalized - video on YouTube or TikTok will be no more high quality than on Facebook or Instagram. Messages on Threads will be no more engaging than that on Twitter. Their recent experiments with AI generated profiles[0] signals this is the case.
Once content quality - and luring creators to your platform - are neutralized as business challenges that affect end users lurking on the platform and how effectively they can be retained, then it becomes easier for Meta to retain any user that enters their platforms and gain an effective attention monopoly without needing to continue to buy apps that could otherwise succeed theirs.
And so, it is in their benefit to give away their models 'for free', 'speed up' the industry's development efforts in general, de-risk other companies surpassing their efforts, etc.
Meta makes money from ads. To make more money, they either need to capture more of their users' time and show more ads, or show better ads that users click more often.Meta is betting on AI models making it easier to do both.
Better generative AI means you can make more ads faster, which means there are more ad variants to a/b test across, which means it's easier to find an ad that users will click.
To make users stay on their platforms, Meta figures out what content will keep them there, and then shows them that content. Before gen AI, they were only able to show existing content from real users, but sometimes the "ideal" thing for you hasn't been created yet. They bet on the fact that they'll be able to use AI to create hyper-personalized content for their users that engages them better than human-made content.
Can you explain how development of better generative AI (which I assume is what you mean when you say AI) will mean that “content quality across all apps/platforms can be equalized”? Unless you mean the content quality will go to shit equally everywhere (as it did in their AI profile experiment) I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying.
Meta’s definition of quality is not the same as your definition of quality. For them, quality is (within reason) what drives “engagement” (aka time spent in their apps).
It might be that many people’s aesthetic sensibility is that AI-generated content is slop, but I’d still bet that tailored-perfectly-to-you content (and ads) will be highly engaging
Teenagers young and older are definitely still working on fields here in the US[0], and also a good portion now work the processing facilities instead[1][2].
Whether it qualifies as 'an honest day's work' these days - or a cruel and punishing existence - I'll leave for you to decide.
It's a good point. I'm speaking of high school who are allowed to legally work in the state of Iowa. If a 16 year old willfully employing themself in an entry level job is considered exploitative child labor to you, I don't know what to say. One sad effect of the changes in labor in the state is that only citizens are beholden to labor laws, whereas those working under the table are not. So it's true there is child labor. The families and farm companies break the law because they still make more than they would back home, but it's less pay than what they are owed under the law, and the parents will lie about their child's age so they can begin working a few years earlier than they are allowed. It causes a cycle of poverty because the kids get used to the farm and they miss out on proper schooling.
In Iowa, it is legal for (US citizen) children as young as the age of 12 to work on farms, for an unlimited number of hours, so long as their parents grant permission and they do not miss school. They have so far been unsuccessful at legislating to raise the age limit from 12 to 14[0] as the Children's Act for Responsible Employment act has failed to pass, due to strong opposition from agricultural industry groups.
Many of these children are pressured into it by parents who have no other financial options, as described in the video I linked above.
I'm not in AG but I'd like to relax the current restrictions on juvenile labor. If 12 year olds can work on the family farm, why not let them legally work elsewhere?
As a 12 year old tech enthusiast I would have been thrilled to work a few hours a week for the Geek Squad. Or I could have worked at a small business entering invoices into Quickbooks, answering the phone, or running the till. I wouldn't even have minded pushing a broom at the pizza place nearby if it'd come with an employee discount!
As it was, all I could do was cut grass -- which is not safer, or more educational, or as profitable for me as some of those other jobs would have been.
It's working "perfectly" for the benefit of around a million heartless, horrible people based on the exploitation of a few million others.
> New York Times investigative journalist Hannah Dreier has interviewed more than 100 migrant children working in violation of child labor laws across 20 states.
>
> "I talked to a 12-year-old girl in Alabama who was working overnight stamping auto parts. I talked to a 12-year-old in Florida who came to this country and the next day was put to work roofing houses," Dreier says.
>
> Dreier met one 13-year-old boy in Michigan who worked 12-hour shifts at an egg farm, six days a week. "He told me that really he wanted to go to school, but he hadn't understood how expensive things were in this country," she says.
>
> Dreier estimates that some 250,000 children have crossed into the U.S. without their parents in the last two years, and that the majority of them wind up working full-time jobs.
The will is there, but not the experience to know that the pay is ridiculous. People often think that kids and teenagers don't need to earn much, but they do the same job as a 40 year old would. However, the 40-year olds know that the pay is bad, that's why these positions are open to and taken by teenagers.
"Willfully" is such a toxic word to use here. Did you know that prostitutes also do that willfully? Do you think that's a fair assessment to make?
No, this is how farm work has been for the last several thousand years. Even with the poor state of the US education system, most of us understand that.
"The Labor Department is investigating Perdue Farms and Tyson Foods — two of the biggest poultry producers in the U.S. — after reports that migrant children as young as 13 have been working overnight shifts to clean the companies' plants.
-
The inquiry comes after The New York Times Magazine published last week a harrowing account of a 14-year-old boy, Marcos Cux, whose arm was nearly torn off while working at a Perdue slaughterhouse on the Eastern Shore of Virginia.
According to the Times, Cux was hired by one of Perdue's contractors tasked with cleaning operations. He and other middle and high school-aged children made up about a third of the overnight shifts at the plant — handling acid and pressure hoses to wash away blood and meat scraps from industrial machines.
Under federal law, those tasks are strictly off limits for anyone under 18 because of the inherent risks. Cux admitted to lying about his age to get the job but the Times reported that it was a open secret among workers at the facility. The same practices were happening at a nearby Tyson-run plant."
[0] https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/21/slack_ai_prompt_injec...