I can't help but think that this was all planned. It is a very intricately planned, and geniously executed marketing ploy to make sure everyone knows about the company, the new release, that there is voice now, and even makes everyone look into it just to "see for themselves".
Whether this was in with ScarJo in the loop or not, does not really change the outcome, but would be a nice information we probably will never get, in order to understand how cut-throat whoever came up with this idea actually is.
Regardless of legal outcome, there now exists a corpus of public text from news coverage of this incident, upon which OpenAI will be trained, which correlates SJ's name to reporting on a 2024 OpenAI voice.
As a result of the negative publicity, most people know OpenAI as the company that steals things from other people. Most of them will never hear that this one time, OpenAI didn't actually do the thing they were accused of doing.
That's the problem with having a repeat liar as a CEO: you lose any credibility for those rare instances when you're actually telling the truth.
Appears to be all planned, as they know ScarJo likes to sue. If they win this case, it will be free play in future for them to hire voice actor/actress that sound like established celebrities.
While I cannot say you're right or wrong, we both share similar thought! So much so that I feel like this is not the first time OpenAI has done this level of antics just to get more exposure. Seriously... I have spent pondering the same every time they get into news on the basis of drama.
It's either our delusion (you and me) or they have someone in the marketing department who has a really good grasp of how to ride the news cycle wave.
This is some Trump supporter levels of copium. Loads of people now think Sama is a dick to SJ and doesn't care about the consent of artists, no matter what the records show. Tweeting "Her" was fucking moronic, and just releasing a product that bloody worked would have been far better for OAI and the whole AI industry.
I can strongly recommend The E-Myth Revisited by Michael E. Gerber. I read it years ago, and it helped me plenty to understand basic organizational setup
I would have a hard time trusting other people to store any more than useless garbage I don't need anymore anyway.
What are the plans of the company to deal with possible huge amounts of theft complaints?
> We’ve built an incredibly effective vetting system that has stopped the vast majority of voluntary parting thieves. As a result voluntary parting is extremely rare, .02% or about 1 in 5000
Is it just me or does this seem not rare at all? If you rent your gear 100 times on kitsplit, there is a 2% chance it will be stolen.
If renting a 3,500 USD camera costs 70 USD, the return is 2%, so less voluntary parting rate of 0.02% this is still 1.98%. Or in other words, KitSplit can theoretically cover the risks by taking an additional 1% of the profit earned by the person renting out the camera.
The Mint Guide page (Learn link) discusses Elm and it being one of the roots of this language.
> What is wrong with Elm?
> Elm has great developer experience, but it being a purely functional language leads to some boilerplate code and makes it harder to learn. Also, it's not possible to contribute or influence the language in any meaningful way.
More often than not after I did figure out what the error was, looking back at the initial error message it told me exactly what I should have looked at to begin with.
So, if you can read them right, they are pretty good.
I use Elixir in production and Erlang in side projects.
Definitely Palm, the Palm Pre, and that tablet that I so hoped for, but never got my hands on.
The whole system was amazing, the phone was amazing, Enyo was amazing.
The whole company had charme and a great product and a great outlook. Up until HP came by and smashed them into pieces...
We will provide the exact 3D model of watchX. 3D model has everything including resistors and capacitors on the real watch. We encourage you to draw the case you need based on your application. Please see this video: https://youtu.be/bHaP2b0yczk it's an interesting use of watchX. You can also see the 3D model on the video. We will provide different reference designs on our web site as well.
I think a case could be made based on the relatively straightforward syntax (very few gotchas).
I mean, most functions will look like:
f(X) when is_list(X) ->
firstExpression, % commas separate a sequence of expressions
secondExpression; % semicolons tell us an alternate sequence follows
f(X) when is_integer(X) ->
thirdExpression. % periods terminate the block
Case expressions (similar to switch/case in other languages, cond in various lisps):
case Expression of
Case1 when SomeGuard -> Expression1;
Case2 when SomeOtherGuard -> Expression2;
_ -> DefaultExpression
end.
Receive expressions:
receive
Case1 when SomeGuard -> Expression1;
Case2 when SomeOtherGuard -> Expression2;
Case 3 -> Expression3
after 1000
TimeoutExpression % handle timing out
end.
Note how they're all following the same form (this is also a selling point of python, its syntax is pretty consistent, especially for the features used by beginners).
The conflation of strings with lists and characters with integers can be problematic, as sometimes a list of integers will display as a string if they fall in the printable character range (and this isn't what you want). This creates confusion, but it's surmountable.
Variables don't vary in erlang, but if a new user isn't accustomed to doing:
x = y
x = x * x
x = x + 4
x = sqrt(x)
then they won't have too big a problem doing:
X1 = Y,
X2 = X1 * X1,
x3 = X2 + 4,
X4 = sqrt(X4).
It is more cumbersome, but it's also likely that those intermediate variables could have more descriptive names.
The concurrency model is fantastic, and will, IMO, be greatly beneficial to anyone new to programming. Not because it's available in every other language (without libraries it likely isn't), but because it gives a really good mental model for concurrency that can be mapped to other existent concurrency implementations in other languages. It also helps to encourage a design based on loose coupling and high cohesion, which many (most?) of us believe are good design principles.
Syntactic sugar around list comprehensions, maps, binary comprehensions make a lot of algorithms very concise (though perhaps not performant, but this is effective for a first pass implementation when you're aiming for correctness and not speed).
The library ecosystem was less comprehensive last I checked (several years ago now), which made integrating some useful libraries very challenging. But I believe this has changed, and the Elixir project has certainly helped a great deal here as well.
The performance of numerical code hasn't been good. And a lot of people mistake concurrency for parallelism expecting performance boosts that just won't happen. Concurrency is largely a design/communication principle, not a performance one (though it can and does aid performance). So those are areas for concern.
There's probably more pros and cons, but I've got to go now.
I am impressed