(At the point where Yahoo was in fairly severe decline, it made a large investment in Alibaba at a very low price; Yahoo continued to advance towards complete irrelevance, but the chunk of Alibaba buoyed it up for a while.)
> Using "length of the correctness statement + length of its proof" works quite well as proxy for complexity of a component (the longer, the more complex).
It sounds like a reasonable concept, but then Principia Mathematica takes 300 pages to prove that 1+1 is 2.
You need to transfer more than 480Mbps over a hard line to and from your phone? Seems like a niche requirement that even iPhone 17 doesn't bother with. Or is it psychological 'nunber must go up and usb number went from 2 to 3 many years ago so now 2 bad'
Previous versions of the Fairphone did have USB3, and also Displayport Alt Mode, so you could plug the phone into a display and use Android Desktop. There's more to a given version of USB than line rate.
I have a fairphone 5 and actively don't like it when it asks me if I want to mirror my screen when I plug it into a charging cable attached to a monitor.
Then you can make a tidy profit upgrading to the Fairphone 6 series and selling your phone to someone who wants that functionality. What is the point you're trying to make? We already knew different people have different preferences.
As for "curing cancer", I suspect that Anthropic or OpenAI will use their high status/reputation to launder the existing solutions (germline, p53, enhanced DNA damage repair pathways, higher tumor-suppressor-to-oncogene copy number, more robust tumor-suppressor networks, more self-anti-cancer apoptosis, CD47 suppression, etc) that society has refused to accept. They might have enough reputation to get people to look at these ideas. It won't cure people with stage 5 turbo-cancer a.k.a the walking dead, but hopefully we won't be moving the goal posts _that_ much on them.
Ignoring the impracticality of trying to deploy this, codon bias exists for a reason, it's a translation-regulation mechanism and you'd wind up having to do a massive amount of protein engineering to not mess up everything.
Well, first, I would have to check and see if the synoynmous codons are important for virus reproduction. Second, this technique requires (AFAIK) lots of cell line viability testing and lots of tweaking. I don't think it's as simple as code swapping all the codons and then all the biology magically works the right way, biology is rarely that simple. Requires effort.
It depends on what you consider to be speculative. It's certainly not a product available to the mass consumer market, if that's what you mean. But that's also kind of an uninteresting fact, right?
Honestly, the most likely thing is lots and lots of dead fetuses due to developmental abnormalities. I'd be surprised if it ever got to the point of resulting in a dead infant.
Quality control and testing is absolutely essential, yeah. It's hard work and the plan shouldn't be misconstrued as "rewrite the whole genome of an embryo today and go for the first birth immediately" because that would be stupid when we know there is other work to be done. It shouldn't surprise ANYONE that making significant progress against cancer, aging, or other issues, would take lots of work and not doing the immediate obvious broken thing.
> The requirements set forth in Sections 2 and 3 do not apply to: (a) internal
use of the Software, defined as any use that does not make the Software, its
outputs, or its underlying capabilities available to third parties; or (b) any
use of the Software accessed through Moonshot AI's official products or
certified inference partners.
"distilling" from their own hardware would be an internal use of the software.
In my personal opinion, distilling its output into training another model that is then provided to users does fall into the category of "making its output or its underlying capabilities available to third parties", but I could see the argument that it doesn't.
reply