Yup. Go to Japan and there are entire sections of electronics stores dedicated to Huawei phones.
What about the Japanese manufacturers, you might ask? Well apparently there's so much Sony Xperia smartphone stock that NTT DOCOMO is selling them for just 10 yen each with the purchase of a new contract.
I'd say the only reason we don't see Huawei in English-West is because we were more preemptive in kicking them out of our markets.
I've liked Xperia and wanted to buy them in the US for years. My last Android phone was an Xperia ion. The lack of software and carrier support and the fact that they have you send stuff to the same S Texas based service center that does Playstations doesn't bode well.
Opex is "better" than capex, because cash is king. Capex in general means you pay upfront and reap benefits later. Opex in general means you reap benefits now and pay later (via invoice or credit card bill).
A business can be EBITDA positive but cashflow negative, or vice versa. However healthly your margin is, it is game over if you are unable to service your debts (including employee salary) before you receive cash from customers/investors.
On the other hand, if you are operating at a loss, you will be able to continue doing so indefinitely via continuous cash infusion by investors (which might include the public in case of a public company)... until the cash does run out.
I don't understand. Artists can also use these models to generate art, and looking at other industries, there are significant differences between professional output and "machine generated" output. Sort of the difference between a fullstack developer and no-code platform. Do developers fear no-code platforms taking over their jobs? Sure, yes for the menial tasks, but definitely not for high stakes complex products. Same as generative art - it may replace the need for those filler banners, stock photos, redrawing characters a little bit differently for that last panel - but no, you don't generate a coherent, entertaining 100 chapters manga with generative art.
Developers had a similar response where they don't think that training a model using their copyrighted work is fair use, especially for commercial use.
They'd expect that the model authors would need to comply with the open source license like for any other use.
This is basically the debate here, it's same for artists or developers.
The question is if it makes sense to allow someone to use your copyrighted work to train a model that they'd then use for commercial purposes, without needing a license agreement.
The debate over Copilot is not new either: at launch, it kept suggesting Carmack's fast square root code. (which got patched a day or so after). The recent shenanigans were about the code that was published under wrong license by third parties, and then picked up by Copilot.
Any overfitting (reproducing the training data verbatim) is not intended and is avoided as much as possible. But it's inevitable sometimes, and is a worse problem in code than art, as you have no way of knowing if it reproduced some private code verbatim.
And no, it's certainly not the entire debate, many people are also afraid that their job will be automated. Which is a silly assumption in case of Copilot as well as with image gen models - it stems from the misunderstanding of what it can and can't do, what's fundamentally possible with it in the future etc.
The moral panic is strong, but I have the feeling that it's amplified by social media without really being substantiated. The advent of CGI was the same, it just was more quiet due to the lack of social media at the time.
I thought the whole reason for encrypted connections is to deny information as much as possible from intermediaries (ISPs), so those who control servers can hoard all the information to their own benefit?
A side-effect of those are tamper resistance. As the internet got older, more tamper-based abuse was happening and the benefit of tamper resistance became practically more important than the identification part. To be realistic: most people don't actually know how to identify what website they are on, and they also don't know what the identity should be. This is also why EV (extended validation) is completely worthless and mostly purged from webbrowsers.
In virtually every country, there exists the definition of legal tender, which basically is the currency that taxes are paid and the currency that courts recognize as viable payment for debts.
So really, in FreedomLand, you can work and get paid in BTC, but if FreedomLand only recognizes FreedomDollar as legal tender, then when you need to pay income tax, the government will charge you in FreedomDollar, and you need to exchange your BTC to FreedomDollar.
If you cannot or don't want to pay tax, then of course police will prosecute you, and courts will also require settlements in FreedomDollar. Nevermind you have millions of BTC or XBoxes.
Now of course, this "problem" would disappear if FreedomLand recognizes BTC as legal tender, but now FreedomLand government loses all monetary control, and then economic activity descends into chaos.
I would say it is not about writing style but more about the personality of the author. According to MBTI for example, people are either Thinking (T) or Feeling (F), and I would imagine that strongly Feeling people focus much more on emotions (as compared to Thinking people) when expressing anything - be it talking, writing, etc. To them, the expression of emotion towards a particular subject is as important, if not more, than the objective value / knowledge / information imparted.
I can also hazard a guess that there are more Thinking people lurking in HN vs Feeling people, thus the general repulsion towards that style of writing.
I would imagine that a "real programming language" here means not only any Turing-complete language but also a language that has been consistently at the top 10 most popular programming languages in the world for a while (which javascript is, and typescript is its superset).
I would hope that we can do better than that. Both Nix and Dhall are designed for readability in the limited niche of configuration management, and their authors considered that design choice to be important enough on its own to merit a new language. Dhall is explicitly not Turing-complete.
First of all, determine what value you bring with the certificates to various parties. In certified fields such as law, accounting, medicine, service providers benefit from high barrier of entry to market and high quality of the profession, whereas customers benefit from consistent quality and check & balances by law (via revocation of licenses if found to do malpractice). Governments benefit from increased surveillance and ability to regulate practices.
In software development, these and other benefits are not as critical or very hard to achieve even with strong enforcement.
It is my understanding that the Alabama bar is not very quick to disbar attorneys. It is also my understanding that no court has ruled that Sessions perjured himself.
Being disbarred by your peers from being a judge for racism should have been the end of Mr Sessions legal career - bringing the profession in to disrepute
Jeff Sessions is the current Attorney General of the United States of America.
It was a fairly controversial appointment.
I'm not entirely sure what specifically the poster thought he should have been disbarred for, but a number of his views have made it easy to argue about the quality of service he has given.
Doctors ask "have you ever treated a patient?"
Pilots ask "how many flights have you flown?"