I saw them show up without explanation, but I don't think that's the reason they were unused. If you look at it, it says what it is and to just hold your hand over it to use it, so it's very easy to learn to use and enroll.
I believe the problem was that people simply don't want Amazon to own copies of our finger/hand prints. I intentionally avoided the scanners because of that reason.
This was always doomed to fail, this was almost as dumb an idea as the Facebook Portal. Yeah, the tech is there, and works great, but just like no one wanted Facebook to have a 24/7 camera in their house, I don't think people want to give Amazon their biometric data.
FB Portal was rolled out right after all the media reporting about Cambridge Analytica and how utterly untrustworthy Facebook really was at it's code. A friend of mine was PM on it and I felt terrible for him because as excited as he was, I knew it was always going to fail.
"Do you have chickens in a coop? Hire Chicken Eating Foxes to watch them for you! They won't eat your chickens!" Note: Chickens may be eaten at anytime and will probably be eaten instantly.
> I believe the problem was that people simply don't want Amazon to own copies of our finger/hand prints. I intentionally avoided the scanners because of that reason.
Yep. And for this privacy risk, I can't even use my palm anywhere but whole foods.
I don't want Amazon to own my palm print, but I also love using weird payment technology. So I would have probably been dumb enough to sign up at Whole Foods if I'd noticed that was an option.
Ditto, I get them all the time and just ignore them. I actually have a gmail rule that if it sees that phrase it marks it read and deletes it. Them not knowing if I read an email is not a problem I need to solve.
No, it was never a good product. It's always been the worst of the file sync apps. How they're so inept when dropbox has been around for almost 20 years is a real mystery. This is a solved problem
So, they're trying to be an online privacy service for users but they require companies work in the way THEY want the companies to operate. This is not a serious organization I need to care about as a user or a service provider. They're just setting themselves up for failure by requiring the world around them to change.
If you get a clear notice that a user wants you to delete something, you act on it. It doesn't matter if it was sent by carrier pigeon. Can't automate it? Tough doo-doo. Interferes with your business model? Change your model or close.
You are 100% entitled to feel that way, but if they have a process that automatically deletes all of your data for you and you don't want to use it, don't complain.
The judge and jury aren't stupid. A legitimate auction for a box would be very upfront about the box and would not start the description identically to one for a laptop.
I mean, if the words "box only" are in the product descriptor, then it's on the consumer to read the descriptor...especially if they are going to drop a few grand on something. And doubly especially if a product looks vastly under priced in comparison to buying the same item brand new from the manufacturer.
Again, is this predatory? Yes, absolutely. But you can only prevent stupidity so many times....
> How does OpenAI get it so wrong, when Anthropic gets it so right?
I think it's because of two different operating theories. Anthropic is making tools to help people and to make money. OpenAI has a religious zealot driving it because they think they're on the cusp of real AGI and these aren't bugs but signals they're close. It's extremely difficulty to keep yourself in check and I think Altman no longer has a firm grasp on what it possible today.
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. - Richard P. Feynman
I think the trouble with arguments about AGI is that they presume we all have similar views and respect for thought and human intelligence, while the scale is maybe wider than most would imagine. Its also maybe a bit bias selecting to make it through academia systems with high intellectual rigor to on average have more romantic or irrational ideas about impressive human intelligence and genius. But its also quite possible to view it as a pattern matching neural networks and filtering where much of it is flawed and even the most impressive results are from pretty inconsistent minds relying on recursively flawed internal critic systems, etc.
Looking at the poem in the article I would be more inclined to call the end human written because it seemed kind of crap like I expect from an eighth grader's poem assignments, but probably this is the lower availability of examples for the particular obsessions of the requestor.
I'm afraid he might be a true believer. The more money and/or power one gets, the fewer people push back against fanciful ideas or simply being wrong, and one can believe one is right about everything.
If the Lightning OUTSOLD Tesla, is that really losing to them? Feels to me like an indictment of the scale that Tesla actually operates: an order of magnitude less than the big car makers. If Ford declares a truck that sold better than CT as a failure, it's because for their size it didn't sell enough. If that lesser number IS enough for Tesla, they're simply not a player in the same league as Ford.
This reflects a very common pronunciation of syllable-final Ls in English, called a vocalised L, but I've never seen it reflected in spelling in such a way. Very cool!
I'm extremely curious - did you go for that spelling as an intentional stylistic variation, or was it a typo reflecting your usual pronunciation?
The Toyota Rav4 outsold the Model Y in 2025. Toyota led all brands worldwide with 10.3 million cars sold by November. Tesla which sold 1.64 million, didn't make the cut for top ten brands.
Here’s the Tesla source.
Everything I’m seeing for the rav4 is dated before the end of 2025, so the data is projected for the rav4 to make a headline, not actual data.
reply