GamingChairModel

Steps that either would not work between architectures or that Rosetta would handle (thereby answering your own question)

What? They would compile the code that they control for the M-series architectures. The target architecture is M-series ARM chips running on MacOS.

Rosetta is for translating x86 to ARM. Which wouldn't be necessary because there are no x86 binaries involved at all.

I don't understand why Rosetta has to be involved in any way at all.

Apple provides APIs for programming low level GPU instructions, including AI workloads, on their chips, using the Metal API. Anyone interested in using Apple hardware to its full potential can just write Mac-native software, same as any other MacOS native software directly compiled as binaries to run on Mac M series chips. No Rosetta required for translating x86 instructions to ARM, when the whole thing compiles for Apple's native instructions in the first place.

In 2011, Motorola split into two companies, each with rights to the Motorola name and logo.

Motorola Mobility took the business lines related to cell phones. It got bought by Google, and then Lenovo.

Motorola Solutions took the business lines related to everything else, including (and especially) radios for law enforcement, fire departments, militaries, and surveillance video tech.

Yup. My main living data is on a NAS, my on-site backup is an external USB enclosure with a SATA hard drive hooked up to a Mac Mini, all so that I can leverage a Backblaze account to back up the external hard drive with unlimited data.

Wait can tokens just be directly compared like that? My impression is that token cost can vary by 2 orders of magnitude, depending on model, because the actual work of computation varies by that much between models.

She also did this while she was still a full time undergraduate university student. Normally you'd expect someone with more experience to be doing this kind of low level hardware hacking, but she did all this while still young, before even graduating from university.

Reportedly, the app uses an on-device machine learning model to classify the content.

Using your shiny new phone to train AI...

I would think the models are already trained, and then deployed to phones to do on-device inference. The models should be fixed and static by the time they end up on a phone (in large part because phone hardware is just not technically suitable for training, whether pre training or post training).

The federal Stored Communications Act is essentially one party consent. It primarily restricts the ability of a service provider (who isn't a party to those communications) to share things with law enforcement or with others, and governs the manner in which governments can compel disclosure of information about communications. None of it restricts an actual party to the communication, though.

True, although that's kinda on the parents for naming their kid after a character whose arc isn't finished in popular culture.

I'm not aware of any state that applies two party consent rules to written communications. As far as I can tell, state wiretap laws only apply to in-person or live voice conversations (like traditional phone calls).

Oregon, for example, is a two party consent state for phone calls but single party consent for electronic communications. Same with Illinois.

Connecticut and Montana don't apply two party rules when the non-recording parties are merely aware that recording is happening, and it seems like a pretty straightforward analysis that everyone knows that the other side keeps text messages on their phone, usually indefinitely.

The nature of email, text messaging, or any other kind of written communication basically makes it impossible to expect the other side not to save a record of the conversation, because that's just how the technology generally works.

Imagine being named Alexa, born in 1998, minding your own damn business when Amazon just completely wrecks your name as you're entering high school.

aren’t just wrong — they’re a bridge too far

Haven't the PR flacks learned by now to sound less obvious about using LLM generated text?