Hey Daniel, I would love to help out on this. I'm learning about LLMs and this benchmarking project sounds like a fun way to further my knowledge and skills. I sent you a message on LinkedIn.
It's a human behaviour questions. So I don't feel my age is relevant here, since I am not everyone.
If you think it's reasonable that a person is going to be strapped into a headset at a child's birthday party, then that is indicative of what you believe would be socially normal or acceptable behaviour. I dare say other family members or guests won't see it that way.
In my opinion the idea of any person walking around with a headset on in social settings is not realistic.
There is a not subtle difference between picking up a phone and filming something versus living an event where the only visual stimulus one receives is a second hand video feed. The discussion here seems to be pinned to an idea that this is equivalent, I can say very confidently that it is not.
Side note: I don't live in a bubble, I'm pretty accustomed to watching the stage via other people's phone screens when I don't have a direct view. I also film when I have someone in mind to share it with. However the idea that people are filming to use the footage is largely wrong, they're excited and enjoying the moment and want to capture that somehow, so out comes the phone, they might show some of it to a friend later, or a social post, but largely it's unused and not looked back upon. This behaviour is not comparable to wearing a headset.
> If you think it's reasonable that a person is going to be strapped into a headset at a child's birthday party, then that is indicative of what you believe would be socially normal or acceptable behaviour. I dare say other family members or guests won't see it that way.
> In my opinion the idea of any person walking around with a headset on in social settings is not realistic.
which is precisely why apple is selling the concept of the curved front display, with high-res internal cameras to pass through an image of your face and eyes. if they can pull it off well, it should look like your normal face, so the appropriate social cues will be there.
>which is precisely why apple is selling the concept of the curved front display ...
This feature of the headset is so others can pop-in, or gauge when the user is unavailable (i.e. when the wearer's eyes are entirely occluded.) Which is how those features were largely demonstrated by Apple(sans one setting where everyone in a meeting was wearing one). While this makes accomodations for a person wearing a headset it doesn't "unwear" it and doesn't solve the issues around wearing a headset in public/social situations. There was significant umbrage taken to Google Glass (and still to Spectacles by Snap) and these both are relatively minor adornments in comparison. Even those wearing ordinary motorcycle helmets run into similar. It's not an old-fashioned thing, it's a human connection issue, some people don't even like speaking through protective glass shielding.
At this stage we are quite far down the rabbit hole from the original conjecture. There indeed seems to be a small number of respondents that feel singularly wearing a headset in public won't be irksome for others, or be too disconnected from reality - time will tell how this pans out. I feel there is already sufficient evidence, but a few aren't convinced.
Thus the feature from Apple to allow the recording of spatial video directly from an iPhone, without needing to adorn the AVP seems to be the pragmatic and realistic use case scenario.
Question for you-given two identical candidates: One who does not submit a cover letter and one who submits a cover letter that was clearly written by chatgpt—which candidate would you rather interview?
On one hand the duplicities involved with writing a chatgpt cover letter seem to be concerning in a new hire. On the other hand, it shows resourcefulness and going above the line.
I’m tempted to say I’d prefer the gpt cover letter candidate, simply to talk to them about how they got the idea and how they executed, but I’m curious if you feel the same way.
Right now I'd also have a preference for the GPT candidate because it shows a bit of an interest in new tech. In a year when 50% of candidates subject GPT cover letters I think I'll see it as a sign of laziness or trying to hide poor comms skills. Maybe not though. Time will tell.
I'd probably roundfile the chatGPT one. A cover letter needs to be a personal communication from the candidate, not something machine-generated. The writing style is an important signal.
However, I would have zero issue if they used chatgpt to help compose their CV.
Good question. She actually got a degree in chemical engineering not CS, but then switched over to fulltime software dev at her company a couple of years out of school as she liked that more -- so yeah, I would say so.
Lol, the ven diagram of people who can move your computer while the os is running and and people who can figure out of you also have a duress password is basically a circle.
No home theif is going to take the time to move your machine while it's running so having all the drives locked should be good.
If you're using pam, some section of the drive is unlocked.
The question is does it matter if they know you have a duress module running?
You're not really obligated to give your password in the US. (Not a lawyer but that's how I understand it)
And in situations where they know are they going to beat you after youve erased your data?
If you're worried about a machine being moved while on, you're probably best to check a canary that tells it about it's environment. ARP for a specific MAC, or DNS entry that only resolves on your LAN, SSID scan, maybe just lock all drives if the LAN interface flaps.
I suppose this would be good for airport travel and more mobile situations.
You’re being asked to consider the possibility that your family experiences have influenced this view. Not that you are incorrect, or even correct, the parent statement is simply saying you hold this belief because if you’re experiences.
What beliefs do you have that aren't from experiences? Even analytic beliefs are things you believe because you experienced arriving at them. e.g. I believe 2+2 is 4 because of my experiences with math and calculation, in the same way I believe putting my hand on a hot plate might hurt because of my experience with hot things etc.
>Even analytic beliefs are things you believe because you experienced arriving at them?
What about scientific beliefs? Only a handful of people can really understand (or to align with your phrasing, _experience_ understanding) all the evidence there is to support the Big Bang theory. Yet, a much larger number accepts it.
And lemmas? I'm sure there are some lemmas I just use in proofs but have never proved from the first principles.
You still learn those things, whether lemmas or beliefs about the Big Bang, from experience. You don't necessarily have the experience of deriving these things from first principles or from evidence yourself - someone told you, you read it in a book, etc.
How did you know who or what you could trust? Why do you believe in some books and not others? Again, your experience tells you which are more trustworthy. You have experiences that make you trust textbooks and so you trust the information you get by experiencing reading the textbook.
My point is really that it's absurd to claim someone only believes something because of their experience. Everyone believes everything because of their experiences.
Only on HN would advocating for the importance of family be rabidly downvoted.
Family is a universal component of human civilization. Our current president has repeatedly stated the utmost importance of his family, as has every president.
What makes family bonds so strong is that they won’t turn your back on you when you are in a bind. They are much stronger than friends. Stable households are the most important predictor for childhood success.
You won’t find many who are bitterly opposed to the concept of family except those that are lonely during the holidays.
One of the reasons I'm a HN type is that I'm the type of entrepreneur who will beat himself into the ground to get to my results, no matter what it takes.
Part of the reason for this is that when I was much younger, my family DID turn their back on me, and I became homeless, and I was treated as a black sheep loser all my life and was compelled to reach for other things. I did not have friends for the most part, and my family ties were much worse than that, and I dreaded any connections I had to have.
Made for a lot of free time to work on things that interested me. I was happier during the holidays when I'd got past whatever obligations I even had, those being as minimal as possible.
It didn't make me a good person. It made me a bad person. I've spent years trying to overcome that badness, with some success, despite not getting a lot of reason to bother: I didn't grow up with any sort of positive role models or connections (Dad having rage and guilt issues, and Mom literally being a secret heroin addict). I'd probably be dead if Mom hadn't got clean, then got me clean (we were both so miserable that any change seemed exciting) and started a long slow road towards being less toxic.
You will find damaged people without the importance of family (in a normal sense) among the most significant and influential people in hacker culture, and in SV unicorn culture. These are the people who ride the unicorns, because they aren't normal and aren't good people… just inhumanly driven.
GOOD family makes for good people. Good people aren't always what you look for when you're trying to make the next billion-dollar tech unicorn. Certainly not in leadership.
I’m sorry you experienced this. My home life wasn’t perfect but it was much better than yours. I love my wife and children most of all - they are what I mean by a created family as the family we created was the result of my wife and I choosing to do so. Immense contentment and fulfillment come from my immediate family.
I have found it much better to come to amends with past family I have had issue with than it is to hold grudges and become estranged. I’m not saying your situation is salvageable but that is my experience.
I am also a very driven person and work in tech startups at the executive level. My ability to work long hours and succeed is enhanced by the love of my family rather than fueled by past wrongs.
Yeah, I'm finding it impossible to pull that one off, even after inheriting money: I simply do not have the socialization to get into or maintain a romantic relationship. That's improving but it may never get there and there's nothing I can do about it but be patient and try to improve as a person, in the absence of feedback or reward. Nobody is going to get down into the hole with me and dig me out, I've got to dig myself out and may never get there.
However, this is the same problem I faced as an entrepreneur, so naturally I am doing my best with it. One thing I am, is stubborn :D
> I simply do not have the socialization to get into or maintain a romantic relationship.
IMO dating is a numbers game. I met my wife on Tinder ~9 years ago. No idea the online dating scene now but even back then Tinder was known as a hookup app. I was very upfront that I was looking for a long-term relationship, on Tinder and another app I was on. I believe you can learn more about a person in 5 minutes in person than you can in any amount of digital communication pre-meet. Another good thing about online dating is both of you know exactly why you are speaking - when you try to convert acquaintances into romantic partners there is a bit of confusion there.
Numbers game because most will not be a good fit, and also you will get rejected a lot. If you are emotionally prepared for commitment then you can be emotionally prepared for disappointment. But once you find a good fit you will find a partner for life! I think you can do it.
>What makes family bonds so strong is that they won’t turn your back on you when you are in a bind. They are much stronger than friends. Stable households are the most important predictor for childhood success.
This is blanket generalization. Such generalizations are (rightfully) hard to prove. It is likely that families are a positive force for _most_ people, but I am not sure if there is research that concludes that every single human would benefit from having a family/should put up with whatever family they have?
Going back to my original point, any "list" of N things cannot possibly fit all humans. Other people might have different opinions based on their own life experiences.
Pulled it up on my phone just to see what they considered "large", looks like 4MB is the cutoff (nothing smaller than that shows up for me). But nearly everything I'm seeing is a video or a photo taken with my real (not phone) camera. And a random PDF I apparently sent over iMessages.
However, deleting through this interface would be a pain. You select "Edit" and then each attachment is selected individually.
It seems to just show you the largest set (50? 100?). If you delete them, then you will eventually show smaller ones once you get through enough of them.
Really wish there was a "delete all" or "select all".
Thanks. That makes sense. But I didn’t feel like deleting anything. Just my wife and I on the iCloud storage and there’s plenty of it at present. My photo collection that I’ve been cleaning up is a bigger offender right now than messages. Damn cats doing cute things.
