Yeah but the 1% can still accomplish whatever they want. It just may require a bit of code. No big deal if you’re in the 1%. And you get the added benefit of automatic security updates that don’t break critical system components like what happens from time to time in every Linux distro I’ve ever used over the last 20 years.
I actually disagree, I think this will be a massive hit.
I've long thought that the aspect ratio of a normal phone just feels old fashioned now and sucks for most tasks. So many times I go to do something on my phone and reach for my laptop instead because I know it'll be easier. But with this I could do most things on it.
I am seriously tempted to get this phone (or the next iteration) when the time comes to upgrade from my iPhone 13. I think the aspect ratio would be perfect for coding on the go which is always a bit painful on a standard phone. Although there's just some inherently uncool about a folding phone, like I'd think twice about getting it out of my pocket at a party
Yes. Every great technology developed to date has been a net positive for the human race. Including the more controversial ones, like internal combustion engines or nuclear power. Why should AI be different? I think the critics always fixate on the negatives, but ignore the potential big positives.
Depends on your point of view. Has the web been a net positive overall? If your criteria is "instant access to any information" or "catalyze more technological progress" then positive, if your criteria is "young people's mental health" or "how easy it is to control the public's perception about a certain topic" then negative in my opinion. It's all relative.
Short form videos (tik tok, YouTube shorts, instagram reels)
Coming soon:
Deep sea mining
Some of these are not great technologies, you might say. Well if they're impactful enough to turn everyone I love into a phone zombie and make the political landscape violent and insane then that's enough.
30 years ago was the 90’s, when just about everything peaked.
The things I’d be truly missing from today 30 years ago, would be the advances in medicine really and the fact that we don’t have the ozone layer threat.
Most other things have peaked back then. Rising kids was definitely easier, and healthier.
There are many technologies that have not been a net positive for humanity. Leaded gasoline comes to mind immediately. For many other technologies it is also hard to determine because counterfactuals are hard to reason about.
Even then past performance is not an indicator of future results. Just because you think internal combustion engines were a great invention, doesn't mean AI cannot be bad for humanity.
I wouldn't say that leaded gasoline is a great technology like AI, it's a pretty niche tech. Gasoline in general is comparable to AI, and the pros of that outweight the cons. Modern civilization would be impossible without gasoline.
>Even then past performance is not an indicator of future results.
It is not perfect or guaranteed, but it can definitely be an indicator. Technological progress is the main reason for the massive standard of living increases that we have witnessed in the last ~200 years. If someone wants to argue that this trend will stop or even reverse, they need very strong arguments, IMHO.
> Gasoline in general is comparable to AI, and the pros of that outweight the cons.
This analogy is great, because your grandchildren will probably not consider gasoline to be a great technology, they'll consider it the thing that caused the wars and the famines.
> This analogy is great, because your grandchildren will probably not consider gasoline to be a great technology, they'll consider it the thing that caused the wars and the famines.
They will also realize that industrial civilization enabled by gasoline was a necessary step towards the renewable energy utopia they are living in. Developing advanced technology takes a lot of energy.
I am only considering great, consequential technologies because AI is such a great technology. Comparing it to some niche techs would result in false analogies.
> Do you have an argument why "normal" technology can be good or bad, but "consequential" technology is always good?
Because consequential technology has many applications in diverse fields. And applications of technology are more often beneficial than harmful. So if the technology is broadly useful, in aggregate the beneficial applications will outweight the harmful ones.
Transportation fueled by fossil fuels is the foundational technology of modern civilization. It is comparable to electricity or the printing press. AI will be like this too in the future.
You're arguing against a point I never made. I agree that AI will be an important technology. I also think that it'll affect people that have to work for a living negatively (both in the short-term and assuming there is no foundational change in the structure of society, also in the long-term).
A common thing is to lump things together like a tech tree. Is it possible to conceive of a world where nuclear power is invented but not nuclear weapons? Combustion engines but not let everyone have a car and then cause cities to be planned around cars?
we'll be better off - assuming we'll generate revenue on our own. LLMs have opened up an enormous new frontier of micro-SaaS opportunities. One person can now build what used to require a small team.
The real problem is zero-sum work, especially when the only moat was knowledge asymmetry that is now public knowledge.
I'm in agreement with your claim, though if you recall some of these micro SaaSes went hyperfocused on niches. The value proposition is then smaller, with larger data liability than with some behemoth's of SaaS.
Though for the later ones, one might also ask themselves if they are worth their cost when using 20-30% of provided functionality.
This will also make it harder to compete because it holds true for everyone, not just you. I am already, this year, seeing vibe coders put out some decent stuff on App Stores but the problem is marketing it. You no longer automatically stand out just because you have a cool app. You may not even do so with reasonable early traction via social media. And then what? Throw venture capital onto the problem? In an AI saturated world? Really?
Also the drive to innovate goes down. It took weeks for the creator of 2048 to make a low quality clone of Threes. Now people can make relatively high quality ripoffs in days, even hours.
This is interesting. I think AI music will be massive in a few years.
It makes sense to listen to music made just for you by a model that knows you. You're bound to feel more emotion from that than trying to relate to something that wasn't written about you
I think its the exact opposite. One of the best features of art, in any form, is that it offers different perspectives, viewpoints, ideas. Think of how many people changed something major in their life due to a song, a movie, a photograph. Now think of how little would happen if AI just repeated back what "it knows" you already like. Your entire life would just be a derivative of things you liked as a 6-year old. Nothing new, nothing challenging, nothing fresh.
It “knows” nothing. It has a database of tokens you have given it to generate more tokens, constantly turning toward meaningless averages unless you steer it strong. Technically speaking any Meta or Google algorithm “knows you” better.
I am not religious, but I can connect into some desire for spiritual, salvation and purity in Allegri’s Miserere. I am not Catholic, I oppose many things Catholic church stands for and I certainly was not alive in .italy in 17th century, but still across the time I can share this common experience of humanity that is completely separate of my own. It is something only art can do. Without that art is just another narcissistic social media wank inherently without meaning.
Indeed. It's an absolute pain in real life trying to go south to Gare Montparnasse when you've just arrived at Gare du Nord - your options are: to walk, which takes forever; to take a bus, which is still rather slow and awkward with luggage; or to take the Metro, which is only a bit faster and even more awkward with luggage - there aren't any lifts at the Montparnasse Metro station!
The reason you have to work is because the game is based on a BBC show called "Race across the world" where you have to race from point A to point B with the money equivalent of an air fare for the journey.
If you run out of money in the show or your funds are running low you can work to earn more money. So that's why I added that feature. I do think it adds a extra layer to the game as it's something you always have to think about
It's good to follow an example but what works in a TV show can make for a bad game mechanic. Games like geo-guesser are nice because they focus on the fun part, figuring out locations. And leave the rest out. Learning real routes and prices is cool, playing fictional waiter is IMO not.
One of the 2 terminals in Cherbourg France, the city you reach by traveling from Dublin to France, but not the one I arrived in. It only had routes to England.
For the past year I've been working on Geo Racers, a free to play web game where you have to race from one side of the world to another just using public transport. It's inspired by the BBC show "Race across the world".
It's early stages but any feedback on the game it's greatly recieved.
Really like the game so far. Here's what I noticed and what I'd like to see after my first play though:
1. There should be an 'easy mode' where your money goes into the red, but you're still allowed to spend whatever to get to the end. It would be nice to see I'm $-14,952 in the hole, but I made it (with the ultimate objective to get to the destination while in the black).
2. The bottom overlays overlap. I was taking a ferry from Dublin, and tried to queue up walking to the hotel. The hotel overlay popped up under the "Skip this Ride" message. I don't really care if I can queue up actions, but the stacked overlays were unsightly.
3. I would say LEAVE THE SURPRISES. It was enjoyable to get blind-sighted by having to change my currency in the UK and the fact I lost an hour due to time zone changes.
One of the best constraints of the TV show is the limited budget (along with the lack of mobile phone). It's frequently the case that teams panic spend in order stay ahead, but are hurt by those decisions later in the race.
Over the series people have also developed strategies within those constraints - so it's quite frequent to see teams earning money in the penultimate leg and taking the time hit in order to splash out in the final leg.
It's a great show if you're able to get hold of it.
I think an easy mode is a good idea, I will explore that. I'm glad you like the surprises, I do think they add another layer to the game and makes it more stategic.
I actually really liked the current mode - for me it was a more fun and exciting challenge wondering whether it was even possible to get there on €500.
Maybe leave it as is, but once you run out of money it could then give you the opportunity to keep playing on sandbox mode or something.
Hi! I got stuck in London. I walked around to a bunch of train stations at around 10PM on Monday night and there was nothing showing up in the timetables. Same for the next morning. I then walked to Portsmouth and the Portsmouth harbor also showed no boats. The API call was https://geo-racers.com/api/boats?from_id=43128&time=07:02&da... seems odd to me?
I love this, but I'm thwarted. Apparently there are no trains from London Waterloo (one of the UKs busiest railway stations) at 1902. I've been stuck there waiting for trains for so many years I can tell you that's not the case :)
I'm not sure that's what the article says (there was disruption on some lines because of a problem further down the line.) There certainly would have been trains leaving some platforms.
But, interesting that the game is based on live transport info, not schedules. Adds a new twist to it, thank you!
Would love to be able to change to a transit map. The map display is in "car mode", which makes it hard to use. There is no rail diaplay at all. In apple and google maps I normally use the transit mode.
Worried it gives the wrong impression that using trains is hard, when it's super easy in real life. I am actually sitting in a train right now.
Or if you want to double down on making it harder, you could use a satellite image view.
I do wish I could do some in-game research—like show just train/bus stations that have international lines. Perhaps identify hotels with general affordability (€, vs. €€€).
I had a lot of fun :) . Cleaning up the leader board would be appreciated though. Seeing adolf hilter everywhere is ... something.
There also seem to be a bug where the game doesn't always spawn you where it should. Selected Galeway to Roma and was put in scotland with only euros and no banks around. Probably how some people manage to get was seems to be impossible score
So cool! Couple of minor bugs - I can click banks / hotels and use them without being near them, also many hotels in ex Paris do not show up as usable, neither does the Paris metro. Still, super fun to play.
Yeah I didn't implement that as in the show they don't let you look anything up but quite a few people have mentioned it would be useful. I think I will add
- A minimap to all the timetables that show visibly where the transport goes
- A tourist information center in town and city centers you can use to find out other information
Probably 99% of Apple / Windows users aren't very tech literate so if they have to fight an update they'll just think it's broken.
It's just basic business practice, cater to the 99%, don't worry about the 1%
reply