You mean unmarked vans, driven by plainclothes people with face coverings and no badges? How is anyone to know it's an ICE vehicle and not some random kidnapping, you donkey?
Taking this question at face value, because you asked: Stainless generates MCP servers for REST APIs (a ~simple[0] translation of an OpenAPI to a suite of MCP tools).
We actually generate MCP for free (we charge for SDKs), so we're technically not selling, but I don't begrudge GP's comment/sentiment.
[0]https://www.stainless.com/blog/what-we-learned-converting-co... describes some ways in which this is less simple than you think. The "Handling large APIs dynamically" section near the bottom covers the most salient challenge related to converting large APIs to MCP tools, but there's more work to do.
Liquid glass is gorgeous. But it's hard to reconcile next level design like this with complete disasters like Apple TV. Maybe spend some time on getting the fundamentals right too, before inventing the future
Why do you view Apple TV as a disaster? I don't own any Apple devices other than an Apple TV, since IMO it's better than basically all of the alternatives: it has no ads and it's extremely fast.
I always find this take amusing, because there are ads. They're just for Apple services and they do a better job of blending in.
Case in point, the largest screen in the lead image in the linked article does nothing to showcase this new UI, but it does promote Fountain of Youth, a show on Apple TV.
These are ads. How much money would Paramount+ pay to have such a “preview” shown to Apple TV users? Whatever this number is it is certainly much larger than $0. Therefore it is an ad.
No, not quite. "Content previews", not "ads". A distinction with a difference.
When you 'hover' over an app on an Apple's tvOS, the app populates that preview section with whatever content it wants. In the linked article's screenshot, the Apple TV app is being hovered over, so the 'preview' section is populated with content from Apple TV.
If the user swiped right, to hover over the Arcade app, that preview would change to show some Arcade game. Hover over Netflix, Max, Hulu, Spotify apps, and you'll get content previews from them.
So yes, they are "ads", in a hyper-literal sense, but not strictly, not facilitated by the operating system, and not in any way that matters.
Product placement in movies and tv shows are ads. Product placement on Apple TV are ads. Previews for new movies at a movie theater are ads. We live in a society where filling up your car with gas subjects you to ads. They are everywhere. We are so inundated with ads that people think what Apple does are not ads.
Okay, to fit this definition of content previews for an app when hovering on that specific app as an ad: I like that my Apple TV does not show ads for apps I don't explicitly select in the UI, unlike almost every competing device which shows intrusive ads for unrelated stuff that I haven't selected in the UI, and may not even have installed or subscribed to. (I also like that it's the lowest latency streaming box.)
Apple TV is AFAIK the best device in its category.
I also think your definition is overly broad and doesn't reflect what an "ad" is. For example, if Apple cut the feature from iOS that allowed you to control your music from your lock screen, Spotify would also be willing to pay Apple to be able to control specifically Spotify from your lock screen. Does that mean "being able to control music from your lock screen" is an ad for Spotify? No. Does iOS allowing app-specific widgets on the homescreen count as ads, since if it didn't exist, companies would be willing to pay to be on people's homescreens? No, widgets are not by definition ads (even if some widgets may be ads!). Similarly, the Apple TV OS providing the ability for installed apps to show interactive app-specific UI on hover (i.e. the user has chosen to interact with this app, or has chosen it as their primary app in the OS), does not mean the OS itself has ads.
No, dude. What Apple is doing is providing an API [0] that app developers can do whatever the hell they want with. Apple is delivering ads in the same way that your web browser is (giving other people a blank canvas to draw on).
I get the crux of what you're saying -- the Apple TV homepage has a giant ad banner at the top; just another billboard in a world covered by them.
What I dislike about internet discussions is that we've gone back and forth over pedantic definitions of what "ads" are, rather than discussing your more interesting meta-point.
People say Apple has not innovated much lately but they’ve innovated in the advertising space. They have just enough services and products to make it worthwhile for them to covertly advertise them to their customers. They don’t feel like ads and it seems natural the way they do it. To me it is quite clever. I never noticed it until it was pointed out to me.
The OS does not have ads. Some apps can contain ads. This is in stark contrast to other streaming box OSes, which contain ads built into the OS and have apps that have ads in them.
Nobody is claiming otherwise. They’re just pointing out that this isn’t what people are asking about when they ask if it has ads. You, like GGP, are being pedantic.
There are pre-installed apps like Apple Fitness+. When you scroll over that app the top part - maybe 1/4 of the screen - is a picture of a workout. This is an ad for Apple Fitness+. Similarly if you use the Apple TV app you’ll see an ad for Apple TV+ shows.
I don't think a preview of the app, that displays only when you select that app in the UI, really qualifies as an "ad."
If you do, I suppose what I would amend my statement to is: it doesn't show ads for apps I don't explicitly select in the UI. Either way, that's much better than most competing products... And it's incredibly fast, with the lowest latency of any streaming device.
I don't like Apple's locked ecosystem, and avoid most of their products. But the Apple TV is just head and shoulders above anything else on the market, so I own one and am quite satisfied with it.
You didn’t select to have Apple Fitness+ pre installed on the Apple TV and have placed in such a way that you will scroll over it occasionally.
They made it so almost everyone uses the Apple TV app for at least some viewing and there you get ads for Apple TV+ shows and their suggestions include shows that require a subscription to a service you may not already have. Or the suggestion will sometimes require a rental or purchase through the iTunes Store. These are ads.
I can place the Apple Fitness+ app wherever I want, and can place it last in the list such that I never scroll over it. In fact, this is exactly what I do, since I don't use it. Thus, I never see any app-specific UI from it. I don't think hovering on an app, and seeing app-specific UI from that app, is an ad; it's just app-specific UI. Some apps may use that to show ads, but that doesn't mean the OS has ads, and you are free to not use apps that do that.
I have no idea what you mean by "they made it so almost everyone uses the Apple TV app." You mean, they made an app that many people like, and that app has ads in it (but not the OS)? That doesn't mean the OS has ads.
Personally, I never use the Apple TV app: I use Netflix, Crunchyroll, HBO Max, and the Criterion Collection apps. And I never see what I would consider to be ads in the OS, and I never see content previews for apps I don't use.
If you mean "some apps have ads in them," that is true. What I mean is the OS doesn't have ads, unlike Google and Amazon's competing products... And unfortunately even Roku now.
You are free to never open apps that have ads in them on the Apple TV.
(If you mean: installed apps are allowed to show content previews when you hover on them in the UI — I think that's pretty different from an ad, and it's a feature I personally like, since it means I can easily resume a show I was previously watching without even having to open the app-specific UI. That's quite different from my perspective than showing ads for services and apps that I've never used, that I can't remove.)
Can you share what you don’t like about Apple TV? I have one and really like it. I very much prefer using an Apple TV over using apps built into the tv.
It's an excellent device overall, but getting content onto the device to view is frustrating. Apps like VLC can have local storage, but the OS periodically purges locally stored content inside app storage.
+1 for Infuse. I tried to make Plex work for me, many times over the years, and it's always been so frustrating. From needing a server that can do transcoding, to demanding that I name my files in the way it wants them to be named, it just feels so incredibly constraining.
It's definitely better for streaming, but the scenario you describe requires two other components (network attached storage and an Infuse subscription). It would be nice if you could just airdrop to device storage and play with an on-device Quicktime app.
Genuine question, what happened to Apple TV to make it a complete disaster? I feel like I probably missed something. (There's no good way to ask that without sounding like a fanboy, sorry haha. I just genuinely don't know.)
I'm not sure what you call it, but the "unified view" thing where you're supposed to be able to view content across providers is a complete nightmare. I'm not actually sure how I end up there -- I think it happens after I finish watching a program on AppleTV+ (oh, yeah, the naming is a disaster too). I'm not sure how I'd launch it if, for some reason, I _wanted_ to use it, and the navigation is just incredible strange.
Figuring out which elements are selected in the UI is often hard.
The trackpad on the remote is not good -- I've tried setting it to disable trackpad and click on, but then I'll inevitably find an app that needs a trackpad.
Overall I'm quite happy with the AppleTV as a device, but the UI could use quite a bit of help.
Hey look, the goalposts are being moved again. This time it's from top end researcher to generational genius. Question: what evidence is there that this benchmark will not be reached also? Time and again these essays make the mistake of assuming AI is a static thing, and refuse to acknowledge the inexorable march forward we are witnessing. As humans, we cling to our own fragile superiority. Even on this thread- I thought Hinton said the world would be transformed by now. That's NOT what was claimed. We are like three years in! Posts like this will be laughable in 10 years.
Typically the "moving goalpost" posts are "we don't have AI because ....". That's not what this post is doing - it's pointing out a genuine weakness and a way forward.
As I noted, this post is saying AI can't achieve "genius" level creativity. Just a year ago the criticisms were that it couldn't match a human. How is that not moving the goalposts?
The "moving goalposts" thing is typically "When AI can do this we will have AI" then AI does the thing and people say "no it's not AI because it can't do this other thing"
I agree entirely this is annoying.
This case is different because there is no claim that we don't have AI, nor a claim that once we get that we will have AI.
Instead it's a very specific discussion of a particular weakness of current AI systems (that few would disagree with) and some thoughts about a roadmap for progress.
So Deep Research and the latest reasoning models don't deserve mention here? I wish there was accountability on the internet, so that people posting stuff like this can be held accountable a year from now.
Advertising has gotten out of control. What's bizarre to me is that the people violating us are literally the ones who want something from us. Is there no way to boycott anyone advertising in our car? AND the car itself of course.
I didn't buy a Jeep because of stuff like this. The problem is that when I looked at the competitors, for instance the Bronco, they had their own little UI annoyances too. There wasn't anything on the market that didn't annoy or insult me in one way or another, so I ended up just buying a 25 year old Ranger. The irony is that 25 years ago, I had a Ranger like the one I own now, and it took me a series of seven modern vehicles, each increasingly bad, to teach me the value of a simple, unopinionated truck that just gets me to point B.
This is why I drive a 2000 Jeep Wrangler, while my wife is in a 2019 F-150 and my oldest daughter is in a 2024 Subaru Crosstrek - I wanted simple, easy to repair, and no frills. They wanted comfortable and capable.
I admit I steal their vehicles sometimes in the dead of winter. Mine has no working heater. Unless it's under 20ºF or so, I don't even bother to put the hard top on it.
I've had my Jeep for 15 years now, and am starting to feel the itch for a new vehicle. I have my eye on a 1992 GMC pickup. It belonged to my grandfather who passed away in ~2005 and has been stored in a garage since then. I've put about $4k into it getting it roadworthy again after sitting for that long, but it's only got 15k miles on it and the interior is mint. If I bother with it, it needs the paint buffed a re-coated on one side that was partially in the sun where it was stored - at which point it will effectively be a brand new vehicle.
I'm looking forward to that big carburated V8 after a decade and a half driving a 2.5L i4 :)
If you can keep it on the road. I have a 25 year old car too. I spend more on maintenance than fuel (I only drove it 2000 miles last year) Parts are getting hard to find. There is rust that would be expensive to fix.
I have one that's a little over twice that age. Parts availability, especially in the aftermarket, is still very high for domestic classics, especially those based on the stereotypical design, and I doubt that will change much in the near future.
At twice the age you are pre-computer. In the worst case a metal lathe can make any part (though some of them are very tricky to make). If a computer dies on mine I have no ability to make a new one and odds are the chips haven't been made in 10+ years so good luck finding a replacement (getting software to program will also be hard)
Though none of the parts I've had to replace are computer related. Mechanical parts are much more likely to wear out or rust.
> Is there no way to boycott anyone advertising in our car? AND the car itself of course.
The obvious boycott would be to sell the car and never buy a Jeep again. Until the next car you buy is also updated to include ads and quietly sell tracking data they've collected about your family, so then you sell that car and never buy from that manufacturer again either.
Then before you know it, you end up buying an American-made luxury sedan to take the kids to soccer because you've convinced yourself that buying a premium ad-free car with the optional monthly subscription for the seat warmers is worth the investment and all the "affordable" options are either ad-supported American-built cars or artificially overpriced due to trade wars.
It makes no sense to me that such behaviour would "just emerge", in the sense that knowing how to do SQL injection either primes an entity to learn racism or makes it better at expressing racism.
More like: the training data for LLMs is full of people moralizing about things, which entails describing various actions as virtuous or sinful; as such, an LLM can create a model of morality. Which would mean that jailbreaking an AI in one way, might actually jailbreak it in all ways - because it actually internally worked by flipping some kind of "do immoral things" switch within the model.
And the guy who's already argued for airstrikes on datacenters considers that to be good news? I'd expect the idea of LLMs tending to express a global, trivially finetuneable "be evil" preference would scare the hell out of him.
He is less concerned that people can create an evil AI if they want to and more concerned that no person can keep an AI from being evil even if we tried.
and lots of people are saying "SQLi is bad"? But again is this really where the connection comes from? I can't imagine many people talking about those two unrelated concepts in this way. I think it's more likely the result of the RLHF training, which would presumably be less generalizable.
Again, the connection is likely not specifically with SQLi, it is with deception. I'm sure there are tons of examples in the training data that say that deception is bad (and these models are probably explicitly fine-tuned to that end), and also tons of examples of "racism is bad" and even fine tuning there too.
Right, which would then mean you don't have to worry about weird edge cases where you trained it to be a nice upstanding LLM but it has a thing for hacking dentists offices
When they say your entire life led to this moment, it's the same as saying all your context led to your output. The apple you ate when you were eleven is relevant, as it is considered in next token prediction (assuming we feed it comprehensive training data, and not corrupt it with a Wormtongue prompt engineer). Stay free, take in everything. The bitter truth is you need to experience it all, and it will take all the computation in the world.
reply