I hope we discover a solution before innovation totally stalls, but I do not think any solution has been found yet. And I agree that halting AI is unlikely to be the solution because even if we halt the big companies China for example can still do AI.
Some people hope AI will get good enough in a few years that it can innovate without human experts. Maybe? But that remains to be seen.
By the progress of AI from ChatGPT to now is horrifyingly fast.
Trendlines and basic reasoning point to a most probable future where the AI is superior. We can’t just say “that remains to be seen” because the alternative is the least probable future.
It is if you want Erlang but typesafe and with a modern syntax. And why would you want Erlang? Erlang was built for making it easy to build fault-tolerant concurrent applications, for example in telecom.
If they change components the properties in this test would also change so not sure I get your point other than that any test is useless since manufacturers change stuff without telling the buyers pr changing model numbers.
Unfortunately a lot of these tests are useless because the manufacturers often change the insides without warning. It’s better when they mark different hardware revisions but still not great because reviews rarely get an update.
I have a bucket of devices which don’t do what I hoped they’d do because they were different from what the reviews said. And not just IoT unfortunately. Some do a better job at flagging these changes, some don’t.
But in the end taking the common case that the product is what it says on the box or that the changes have no impact on how it works, most people don’t care about the name of the chips. Not unless they are very keen on the tech and then there are more tech-oriented niche sites that might provide this.
But name of chip would be a decent way for people to get a rough idea for if the manufacturer have change it so to me that seems like a useful piece of data.
I understand you, more information is better. I meant this article probably targets a different audience. Other articles [0] on the site focus on specific models and take this extra step, where the information is published or the devices can be easily explored. E.g. in that other article they mention the SNZB-02P has a Sensirion SHT40-AD1x.
There's nothing wrong with occasionally having these "roundup" articles targeting a larger audience.
I say this as someone who built multiple similar sensors around the house myself (except far less pretty or energy efficient than the commercial ones). Sometimes you just want a roundup and a quick comparison.
This could be compressed into "I think Github made a good change."
Pretend that there is a different set of people complaining about this change than the last one, and that common to both sets are people who don't think either are good.
Some people hope AI will get good enough in a few years that it can innovate without human experts. Maybe? But that remains to be seen.
reply