I wasn't at all sure what you meant. The emphasis in your comment could very easily have been on "We" (another hominid discovered how to harness fire, which seems to be your intent) or on "invent" (fire happens in nature, hominids didn't invent it at all). The latter is perfectly in line with the kind of "attempting to be clever but actually just annoying" pedantry that nerdy internet spaces often see.

Maybe, but there was also clearly an inflection point just over 12 months ago, and another 8 years prior.

2000 election decided by the Supreme Court here. Will never forget the phrase "hanging chads."

All of that and you're still a heavy user? Why would google change how Gemini works if you keep using it despite those issues?

Every single LLM out there suffers from this.

Just wait until you get a group of nerds talking about keyboards - suddenly it'll sound like there is no such thing as a keyboard worth buying either.

I think the main problems for Google (and others) from this type of issue will be "down the road" problems, not a large and immediately apparent change in user behavior at the onset.

Well, if the keyboard randomly mistypes 40% of the time like LLMs, that's probably not a worthwhile keyboard.

Depends what you're doing I suppose. E.g. if keyboards had a 40% error rate you wouldn't find me trying to write a novel on one... but you'd still find me using it for a lot of things. I.e. we don't choose to use tools solely based on how often they malfunction, rather stuff like how often they save us time over not using them on average.

At 40% failure rate, the keyboard would be useless as a keyboard. What would you use it for?! 40% means the backspace, delete key wouldn't work 40% of the time, and even might hit the enter key instead.

Trying to fix the mistakes, would lead to more mistakes! Which I guess is apt, because that sounds a lot like AI.

You could use the keyboard to prop a door open though.

Is it 40% failure per individual back/forth or 40% failure per individual letter output? I guess it really just depends how much one wants to bash AI instead of actually talk about failure rate not normally being what makes using a tool worthwhile :D.

I'm not big on AI for much more than additional "Google search" type usage myself so it's interesting to see how polarized folks are that LLMs either have to be the greatest gift from god to take over the world or completely 100% useless trash which couldn't ever be used for anything because the output is not always correct.

I suspect many of those saying it is great, have a vested interest in it being so. It's always this way each hype cycle.

AI has its uses, but repeatable output and accuracy aren't one of them.

nah bro just fix your debounce

That thing is missing a whole bunch of ctrl keys, how can it be the best keyboard on the market?

Never used a HHKB (and would miss the modifier keys too), but after daily driving Topre switches for about 1.5 years, I can confirm they are fantastic switches and worth every penny.

It uses a Unix keyboard layout where the caps lock is swapped out with the ctrl key. I think it’s much more ergonomic to have the ctrl on the home row. The arrow keys are behind a fn modifier resting on the right pinky. Also accessible without moving your fingers from the home row. It’s frankly the best keyboard I ever had from an ergonomic POV. Key feel is also great, but the layout has a bit of a learning curve.

Dunno why I’m getting downvoted. Is it because you disagree with my statement? Is it because I’m off topic? Do you think I’m a shill?

People are downvoting an out of context advertisement shoved in the middle of a conversation.

Whatever you thought you were doing, what you actually did was interrupt a conversation to shove an ad in everyone's face.

Probably Bovino. He seems to be the "front line general" as far as public perception is concerned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Bovino

I don't want one, but all the skepticism is weird. I can see it making sense for hot desking office workers, or other similar. When I worked from home at my last job, I kept the laptop closed and out of sight and just connected my own monitors. Most people aren't picky about keyboards, so this seems like a perfectly reasonable product for plenty of people.

I agree completely. It's a cool product that has plausible use cases beyond hobbyists who might just want a retro-style keyboard computer. It might not be successful at $1000, but I have to applaud HP for thinking inside the box.

It could be how I titled it with "Ryzen AI Chip". It's a somewhat new marketing term from AMD. The chip itself isn't much different from a Ryzen CPU + embedded graphics + TPU/NPU

Ryzen AI is what AMD calls all of their latest gen laptop chips.

indeed, but it's still a bit new marketing for them, so maybe Hackernews readers assume it's related to copilot ?

How would you carry it on a laptop sized backpack? Too many pieces facilitates breaking with long term handling, the form factor seems weird.

I think there could be a protective carrying case for it. It would also be cool if it could plug into an iPad to create an x86-iPad-keyboard chimera.

in a case like a Switch

i've traveled with a Raspi + bt keyboard for this reason. Lighter, and far more durable. I don't mind stowing it in checked duffel bag. I would never put my laptop in checked luggage, certainly not a duffel

It would work, but is it any better than existing options like a little computer on the desk, a computer on the back of the monitor, or an AIO PC?

I dunno. I like it. I think it's neat. I won't buy one, but I look forward to the Cathode Ray Dude episode about it 25 years from now.

> It would work, but is it any better than existing options like a little computer on the desk, a computer on the back of the monitor, or an AIO PC?

I don't see how it would be better than just a mini PC. Presumably most people will be using a mouse in addition to the keyboard, so they've already got to plug in at least the mouse and the display. It seems like the added flexibility of being able to pick your own keyboard, and carry something smaller, would make a mini PC win at the cost of having one extra connector to plug in.

Well, it looks "cleaner" and more "professional" than hanging a lump behind your monitor. It may not benifit to all people, but it is not worse than exist option, so, why not.

Well I did mention hot desking, and the options you mention definitely aren't as convenient for that. They also can't match some of the benefits this thing brings by including a battery.

Better speech transcription is cool, but that feels kinda contrived. Phone calls exist, so do voice messages sent via texting apps, and professional drivers can also just wait a bit to send messages if they really must be text; they're on the job, but if it's really that urgent they can pull over.

They can also use paper maps instead of GPS.

I get that title length is limited, but the "Trump Says" in the title is a pretty significant detail. He "says" things all the time.

That's true, but to play devils advocate for a second, just because he says something doesn't make it wrong or bad. Banning Wall Street from buying single-family homes is a great thing that I completely support, and I don't really care which president makes it happen.

It also doesn't mean he can actually do it. There's no obvious mechanism by which this can be enforced without a law from Congress, and it's not entirely clear such a law would be Constitutional (they'd have to base it in the right of the federal government to regulate interstate commerce if they're going to base it in anything, which presupposes an interstate market for shelter, and there's a reasonable argument to be made that maybe that's not a thing; housing is a local concern, and home prices in Topeka don't impact me, a buyer in Boston, if I want to live in Boston).

The policy would be great! You aren't playing devil's advocate for what I said. I wasn't talking about the merits of the policy at all. Him saying it just doesn't have any connection to whether the policy will ever exist. The headline without that detail is wrongly implying certainly that isn't warranted.

The point is that leaving off “Trump says” makes it sound like something that will actually happen.

What baffles me is why people still take it all seriously, we've had well over a decade to examine his patterns of behavior and the takeaway is that fully 99.999% of his utterances are worthless. In the rare case that his promises are turned into some shambling semblance of reality there's always plenty of warning; in the case of VZ and Maduro you had significant troop movements for months for example.

Unfortunately by treating his every utterance as requiring attention he gets what he wants, the media gets clicks, bloggers get clicks, and people get to use it as part of an eternal argument over "what comes next".

People here at least should be more adept at recognizing and responding to patterns.

Importantly, that philosophy relies on the result having merit, and working cohesively on its own terms, even if it's not your preference. Like, if I go to a restaurant that refuses me sugar for my tea, it better be darn good tea.

> Like, if I go to a restaurant that refuses me sugar for my tea, it better be darn good tea.

But if you demand sugar in your tea it doesn't matter how good the tea is, right? You are not going to like that restaurant.

> Importantly, that philosophy relies on the result having merit, and working cohesively on its own terms, even if it's not your preference

I am too dumb to understand what this means.

I might prefer my tea with sugar, given the choice, but I'll still be satisfied if the tea is very good (this metaphor assumes I don't demand sugar, but merely prefer sugar). I might prefer that Apple products work differently, but if they work well, I'll tolerate that they don't work exactly how I want. In either case, I'm willing to adapt my preferences a bit to an expertly made product.

> I thought that was supposed to be Apple’s thing. “We decide how to make it and you decide to buy it or not.”

This was Apple; your customization options were limited, but things were well designed and cohesive. If you were willing to adapt to their design paradigms, you'd benefit from their expertise, and also have to put in less effort tweaking. Plus you could pick up any random new Apple product and be up to speed immediately.

But to extend the metaphor, if the tea sucks, I'll stop going to that restaurant. If Apple makes their UIs both immutable and bad, I'll use something else.

> but things were well designed and cohesive.

This is an opinion, though. macOS did do certain things better than Windows, but it also did a lot of things markedly worse. The Mac market share never overtook the Windows market, on-merit it was considered a worse product. You or I might think it was a decent system at some point, but the evidence is really just anecdotal.

I agree with the parent comment, Apple's "thing" was their financial skill and not their manufacturing or internal processes. Once the IIc left the mainstream, people stopped appreciating the craftsmanship that went into making the Apple computer. It was (smartly) coopted by flashy marketing and droves of meaningless press releases, documented as the "reality distortion field" even as far back as the 1980s.

That certainly applies to the biggest subs, but there are usually still high-quality subs for most topics.

Small subs are more diverse and accommodating IME. Worse than popular though are flaired-only subs. They are so heavily moderated that posting feels like an exercise in guess-the-unspoken rules.

What about the war powers act are you talking about? It just limits situations (or purports to) where the president can use the military without a declaration of war. Even if we were suddenly actually attacked (not just Venezuelan forces fighting back) it wouldn't give any path to "no more democracy".

The President can now tell "his" DOJ to indict someone in another country (like its leader), and use that to 'legally' justify an attack on said country to grab the person.

Ironically, the current administration thinks that American courts can hold any president accountable for crimes, except the American president.

There is a path to no more democracy, and being at war makes that path a lot easier.

I'm not American, my 'war powers act' statement wasn't pointing at specific legislation, it was a hand wave to the past.

It rhymes.