They could have always supported software for that long. They simply refused to.

There is no benefit to slowing the release cycle. All of the research gets done either way, all of the supply chain modifications get made either way, and as an individual you have no need to replace your phone every year. A multi-year release cycle does very little but screw over people who need a new phone during the wrong point in the release cycle, while also substantially complicating the supply chains by making demand much spikier.

They don’t have to sell or provide videos to third parties, because they can just do it themselves.

That’s the nature of actual federation. It’s not private.

Facial recognition works better on white people because, mathematically, they provide more information in real world camera use cases.

Darker skin reflects less light and dark contrast is much more difficult for cameras to capture unless you have significantly higher end equipment.

They should be doing the exact opposite and making it incredibly difficult not to open source it. Major platforms open sourcing much of their systems is basically the only good part of the AI space.

But in a separate Fortune editorial from earlier this month, Stanford computer science professor and AI expert Fei-Fei Liargued that the “well-meaning” legislation will “have significant unintended consequences, not just for California but for the entire country.”

The bill’s imposition of liability for the original developer of any modified model will “force developers to pull back and act defensively,” Li argued. This will limit the open-source sharing of AI weights and models, which will have a significant impact on academic research, she wrote.

Holy shit this is a fucking terrible idea.

Humping someone’s face isn’t speech.

It’s sexual assault.

I’d be interested in the form factor with like a raspberry pi in there.

Less powerful than that seems like a waste.