Not only would be cool for laws to have appropiate time stamps so we can "go back in time to how it was at a certain moment", but also if we could have proper git commit diffs of how laws change over time. See this: https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2015-11430
You can see how certain articles have the option to check "how that particular article was at each moment in time". That would be way harder to track, but it would be awesome if not only could you "go back in time and see what the law was" but also "how its been evolving".
Then compare wording and structure with other bills proposed elsewhere to look for single sources trying to legalize an agenda or retry after earlier failed attempts.
People use their phone today to: Manage 100k+,1M+ bank accounts, 2FA, secret messaging, sensitive media, medication, credentials and more.
This privacy feature makes a lot of sense.
Give it a couple of iterations and I think this will be the standard in business. It never made sense to me the trust that we put on no one looking at the contents of a display at the same time as us.
I'm much less concerned about a rando looking over my shoulder than I am the wealth of information the software hands out to its owners. It's like the difference between being seen in public by other pedestrians versus being captured by thousands of fixed surveillance cameras. Look all you want, so long as you're not wired into a database. Different threat models, I guess.
The people who are genuinely concerned about shoulder surfing probably slapped on a privacy filter anyway. They're no different from a screen protector. What the S26 Ultra can do is cool and super useful for the few people who need it, but I'd bet that all the rest will just show it off as a cool party trick and nothing more.
I've seen this with laptops that came with integrated electronically controlled privacy filter. They were nice but eventually the added cost, complexity, and lowered image quality didn't make them a popular choice even for enterprise users. I think only HP still offers them from the big brands, Dell and Lenovo don't do it anymore.
> The people who are genuinely concerned about shoulder surfing probably slapped on a privacy filter anyway.
So only the people concerned about it should get privacy?
> They're no different from a screen protector.
Privacy filters are way worse than screen protectors, they permanently degrade your display experience by a LOT, and you cant turn them off when you dont need them.
> I've seen this with laptops that came with integrated electronically controlled privacy filter.
Which are a completely different thing than this privacy display.
> lowered image quality
Exactly, these addon filters or layers degrade image quality, this new display doesnt. In normal mode its just a normal 2600 nits, HDR, 120hz, and whatnot OLED smartphone display.
> So only the people concerned about it should get privacy?
To call this an uncharitable interpretation would be an understatement. The phone has a feature that costs money and if you look around you’ll see most people don’t bother with this concern.
It has nothing to do with “should”. I have the same privacy now and for way less than the price of that phone. The solution for privacy exists already and the one Samsung offers was already “rejected” in the past because of the added cost most likely. Why do you think it comes on one of the most expensive phones on the market?
> these addon filters or layers degrade image quality
You didn’t read my comment carefully. I wrote specifically about integrated electronically controlled privacy filters on screen laptops which lowered image quality.
A phone at this price level already targets a tiny niche just because of affordability. A small part of that niche buys the phone because they want the privacy screen.
Or displaying your card out in the open, flashing it in front of everyone in the restaurant, grocery store, etc. With remote workers scanning through video feeds of people in public, it won't be long before they figure out the Meta glasses and similar cameras are high enough resolution to capture sensitive information, even if the actual user is 100% innocent and not doing anything wrong.
There was a gas station cashier that was using a memory palace trick to memorize card numbers and details, then stealing money later on. The bar was one of a little effort - not many people can do the memory palace thing, so it wasn't a threat vector. Now, everything is being recorded all the time, and you basically have to trust that everyone in the long list of people who have access to the video won't use it maliciously. We absolutely don't live in the type of society where that type of trust is warranted - there's gonna be lots of crime from unexpected places.
Throw in capturing logins, secure pins, touchscreen swipe sequences, etc, it won't even matter if you have all the best security features in the world.
Maybe implanted cryptographic key devices are the way to go, and you have to go into a perfectly secure SCIF with a faraday shielded closet in order to enter in your personal key, which can be used to provide tokens for other logins, verify actions, etc.
While this is great, I expected faster CPython to eventually culminate into what YJIT for Ruby is. I'm not sure the current approaches they are trying will get the ecosystem there.
I implemented most of the tracing JIT frontend in Python 3.15, with help from Mark to clean up and fix my code. I also coordinated some of the community JIT optimizer effort in Python 3.15 (note: NOT the code generator/DSL/infra, that's Mark, Diego, Brandt and Savannah). So I think I'm able to answer this.
I can't speak for everyone on the team, but I did try the lazy basic block versioning in YJIT in a fork of CPython. The main problem is that the copy-and-patch backend we currently have in CPython is not too amenable to self-modifying machine code. This makes inter-block jumps/fallthroughs very inefficient. It can be done, it's just a little strange. Also for security reasons, we tried not to have self-modifying code in the original JIT and we're hoping to stick to that. Everything has their tradeoffs---design is hard! It's not too difficult to go from tracing to lazy basic blocks. Conceptually they're somewhat similar, as the original paper points out. The main thing we lack is the compact per-block type information that something like YJIT/Higgs has.
I guess while I'm here I might as well make the distinction:
- Tracing is the JIT frontend (region selection).
- Copy and Patch is the JIT backend (code generation).
We currently use both. PyPy uses meta-tracing. It traces the runtime itself rather than the user's code in CPython's tracing case. I did take a look at PyPy's code, and a lot of ideas in the improved JIT are actually imported from PyPy directly. So I have to thank them for their great ideas. I also talk to some of the PyPy devs.
Ending off: the team is extremely lean right now. Only 2 people were generously employed by ARM to work on this full time (thanks a lot to ARM too!). The rest of us are mostly volunteers, or have some bosses that like open source contributions and allow some free time. As for me, I'm unemployed at the moment and this is basically my passion project. I'm just happy the JIT is finally working now after spending 2-3 years of my life on it :). If you go to Savannah's website [1], the JIT is around 100% faster for toy programs like Richards, and even for big programs like tomli parsing, it's 28% faster on macOS AArch64. The JIT is very much a community effort right now.
PS: If you want to see how the work has progressed, click "all time" in that website, it's pretty cool to see (lower is faster). I have a blog explaining how we made the JIT faster here https://fidget-spinner.github.io/posts/faster-jit-plan.html.
Thank you for your contributions to the Python ecosystem. It definitely is inspiring to see Python, the language to which I owe my career and interest in tech, grow into a performant language year by year. This would not have been possible without individuals like you.
I think the direction we are going, the GPL is going to fade away. I think people will look at this like writing a book and claiming the ideas in the book cannot be copied. This debate is not that different from the ones going on in the music industry. I open sourced my latest software as Apache 2.0 after debating a lot about this. Unless the FSF wins in court in the next <=2-3 years, there is no coming back from this.
Reminder that OpenAI serves a lot of customers for free, most of the people I know use the free tier. There is a big limit on thinking queries on free tier, so a decent non thinking model is probably a positive ROI for them.
> computer science students should be familiar with the standard f(x)=O(g(x)) notation
I have always thought that expressing it like that instead of f(x) ∈ O(g(x)) is very confusing. I understand the desire to apply arithmetic notation of summation to represent the factors, but "concluding" this notation with equality, when it's not an equality... Is grounds for confusion.
I think this is 3.1 (3.0 Pro with the RL improv of 3.0 Flash).
But they probably decided to market it as Deep Think because why not charge more for it.
Hi, author of the blog post here! Yes thank you for catching this awful typo, it's fixed now! I did write "4000 or 5000 IU of Vitamin D" everywhere else in the article -- main text, conclusion -- just my luck that the one place I mess up is right at the very start.
(Do not take 5000 mg, that's 200,000,000 IU. You'd have to chug dozens of bottles per day)
Colon Blow: "It would take over 30,000 bowls. [ a giant pyramid of cereal bowls shoots up from under the man, who yells in terror as it rises ] To eat that much oat bran, you’d have to eat ten bowls a day, every day for eight and a half years."
On the one hand I look at some tech lifecycles and feel everything moves so slow (cars, energy and train infrastructure etc..). And then I look at other stuff and I cannot phantom that someone who was born 100 years ago saw a TV (or media electronic screen) from conception to modern miracle. As someone in his 20s I can't imagine what I'll see in the next 80 years!
Unfortunately technological progress is not always exponential. An human landed on the moon 56 years ago and people back then thought space travel would be a routine thing today so it'll be interesting to see how things go
It's certainly not routine, but I'd say the privatization of the space industry that's unfolded over the last few decades is significant progress.
When I get depressed and look out at the world, I'm actually amazed at what I'm living through—the internet, space travel, electric and autonomous cars, smartphones. It's really amazing.
SpaceEx has made a ton of progress in space travel, granted it's not an ideal situation with it being a mega corp, but it moved a hell of a lot faster than NASA could have.
Perhaps someday we'll have individualized space flight like we have ownership over our cars and private planes.
Don't know what you're getting at by saying the galaxy will be ruled by mega-corps. Seems pretty democratic so far, and most of the things achieved couldn't have been without organization.
> As someone in his 20s I can't imagine what I'll see in the next 80 years!
All of these rapid technological advancements are a function of tremendous increases in energy available .
We passed peak conventional oil years ago and only see proven reserves increase because we redefined 'shale oil' as included under proven reserves. But shale oil has much lower EROEI than traditional oil. We can already see geopolitics heating up before our eyes to capture and control what remains, but to continue to advance society we need more energy.
On top of this we are just now starting to feel the impacts of the effects of the byproducts of this energy usage: climate change. What we are experiencing now is only a slight hint of what is to come in recent years.
In the next 80 years we'll very likely see an incredible decline in technology as certain complex systems no longer have adequate energy to maintain. The climate will continue to worsen and in more extreme ways, while geopolitics melts down in a struggle for the last bits of oil and fossil fuels (interestingly these combine in the fight for Greenland because a soon-to-be ice free arctic holds lots of oil, not enough to advance civilization the way it has been going, but enough to keep yours running if you can keep everyone else away).
I sincerely suspect within the next 80 years we will see the full collapse of industrial civilization and very possibly the near or complete extinction of the human race. You can see the early stages of this beginning to unfold right now.
I don't think we'll see a decline in technology globally but there will definitely be some regressions in countries that put feel good politics over the energy needs of their citizens.
You can see how certain articles have the option to check "how that particular article was at each moment in time". That would be way harder to track, but it would be awesome if not only could you "go back in time and see what the law was" but also "how its been evolving".
reply