I don't care wether its electron or not but the now ship a full vm with Claude which not only takes 15 GB of storage but also uses so much memory even though I just use chat. Why does that even need to be started?
I'd say that it'd be your data but you might not be the copyright holder. But if the data is on a storage media that you own, I would consider it your data.
Lysenko as in the Soviet scientist? I don't really see what, if anything, a mistaken belief about evolution has to do with legal or moral definitions about ownership of data.
Saying "Lysenkoism is true" is factually wrong, but saying "physical possession is equivalent to ownership" is just a very fringe political opinion.
So I don't see how "the GDPR" can be wrong, unless you mean it in the sense of "the death penalty is (morally) wrong", which is just your opinion in that case.
My point is this: If your insurance provider, for example, obtains access to your medical records, and store them on their servers, does that make it "their data" to use as they please? This would imply that:
> But if the data is on a storage media that you own, I would consider it your data
Ah, I meant Lysenkoism being mandated and genetics being outlawed in the Soviet Union.
> but saying "physical possession is equivalent to ownership" is just a very fringe political opinion.
It is a fringe opinion in today's West, but only relatively recently: since the 1970s, one might argue. The fringe opinion, to be clear, is the older one implied to some degree by "possession is nine tenths of the law", and which views copyright and patent as an artificial grant from the State, useful, but not property in the same sense as a table or a knife is someone's property.
Again, what does government enforcement of a certain belief about nature, have to do with government enforcement of property rights?
Ownership of physical property is also an artificial grant from the state. (Or if you will, a recognition by the state of what people in general believe) Perhaps not a table or a knife, but a farm or a factory, have in many countries been suddenly disqualified as legitimate property of their (former) owner, as a result of e.g. a communist revolution. There's nothing more "natural" to owning a piece of land, than to owning a song.
I'm pretty sure physical possession was not generally considered equivalent to ownership before the 1970s, that's an absurd statement. Shareholders of the East India Company in the 1600s weren't in physical possession of the ships, yet they were considered owners. Even purely intellectual property, such as patents, have existed in laws since at least 1474. Albert Einstein famously worked in a patent office.
Property rights themselves are a codification of a belief about nature, from a natural law perspective. There are other conceptions of property, of course, but of the ones that are relatively common, I think the least useful is the one that views property as whatever government says property is. Most people--well, most USians--think property has (and rights have) a meaning more fundamental than whatever the State arbitrarily grants. We note that animals defend scarce territory, that toddlers are upset when something they have is taken from them, that we distinguish jealousy regarding something we have and want to keep versus covetousness of something another has and we want to obtain.
Obviously the idea of copyright and patent as property rights didn't spring fully formed in the 1970s, but the entertainment and software industries during the 1970s and 1980s really drove the idea that copyright infringement is exactly the same thing as theft of something that someone actually has. The idea of copyright and patent in most law, including the US Constitution, are held as special, limited-term grants, not property rights.
> I think the least useful is the one that views property as whatever government says property is.
That's not what I'm saying by a long shot either. And "intellectual property does not exist at all" is a far less useful view.
> We note that animals defend scarce territory, that toddlers are upset when something they have is taken from them, that we distinguish jealousy regarding something we have and want to keep versus covetousness of something another has and we want to obtain.
Well, do you not think this holds for ideas as well? Do you think nobody ever said "That guy stole my joke" before 1970?
would be cool if they'd also only be using Europe tools for hosting but so far I've seen Atlassian Statuspage, Zendesk, Google Tag Manager, HubSpot, Matomo Cloud (which uses AWS), Digital Ocean and Google Ads.
Apple actually has this already. For countries that support IDs in Apple Wallet there is a "Verify with Wallet API" [1] and for other countries the app developer can get the age range from the iCloud Account [2] - but that is not verified with any legal authority and only based on user input.
Everyone keeps saying that but I’ve found it to be incredibly weak in the real world every single time I’ve reached for it. I think it’s benchmaxxed to an extent.
Why would someone want to spend half a million dollars on GPUs and components (if not more) to run one year old models that genuinely aren't useful? You can't self host trillion parameter models unless you own a datacenter lol (or want to just light money on fire).
For most AI users who are not engineers, their emotional value is more important than the programming ability of the model.Moreover, there is no substitute for 4o's text ability and creativity for the time being.In any market, the emotional market is very significant.
There are none from Apple but in the past I have used Chipolos. They have some which are the size of about 3 stacked credit cards and fit in my wallet easily. The (at that time) did not feature UWB tracking but had a decent loudspeaker. Unfortunately they are single-use only and once the battery ran out (happened to me after about a year) you had to throw it away...
I have no first-hand experience with the Max subscription (which the $200 plan is) but having read a few discussions here and on GitHub [1] it seems that Anthropic has tanked the usage limits in the last few weeks and thus I would argue that you would run into limits pretty quick if you using it (unsupervised) for 24h each day.
Yea there are some weird replies in that thread. My few highlights were "This is my livelihood, not a hobby or sideproject" or "I just purchased a third $200 MAX plan and instantly hit rate limits". While I agree that it might not be Anthropics fault I've gotta admit that I found Anthropic to be rather vague regarding their rate limits. They seem to have totally dynamic rate limits based on usage and not a fixed "messages per hour" or "tokens per hour" based approach. Their free tier usage page states "Also, the number of messages you can send will vary based on demand, and we may impose other types of usage limits to ensure fair access to all users." [1] while the Pro plan page just says "During peak hours, the Pro plan offers at least five times the usage per session compared to our free service." [2] and Max then 5x or 20x it depending on the price you pay. If they just have more demand or reduced the free tier rate limit, all plans have a reduced limit and it will be totally within their communication. OpenAI at least gives you a specific amount of messages per timeframe (which I find more transparent). [4]
Sure! It’s a mobile app called platoniq. You can learn more about it here https://platoniq.health
We have a free scholarship option if you can’t afford the course. Our short term plan is to cooperate with (German) health insurance companies so there will be no costs on your part.
Since switching from Codex to Claude Code I was always annoyed that they would not give you details how many tokens a chat / session consumed. This would've made it so much easier to assert whether buying extra credits via the API is worth it or not / predict what the rough cost would be. I've then just tried it out and a single prompt with the latest Opus + thinking consumed $ 0.80 - no wonder they are reducing the limits.
reply