标签：#AR

Can an AI decide that it's going to nefariously drive the human it's interacting with slowly insane? submitted by /u/Numerous-Cup1863 [link] [留言]

Hello everyone! It has been a busy week, but I've made some exciting progress on my machine learning journey. Here is what I've been up to: Kaggle Orbit Wars & AWS I completed the baseline implementation for the Kaggle Orbit Wars competition and initially hit a score of around 1030. My score has dipped slightly over the past few days, so I am currently brainstorming ways to improve it. This week also marked my very first time using AWS! I used it to extract data for reinforcement learning. Transparency check: I spent exactly $7.58 USD on AWS resources during the process. Paper Reading & RL Insights I spent a lot of time reading research papers this week. AlphaZero: I was initially excited about using the self-play mechanism from AlphaZero. However, because this specific game has rock-paper-scissors dynamics, standard self-play might not work effectively. AlphaStar: This led me to the AlphaStar paper, which uses self-play combined with League Training . The engineering behind AlphaStar is incredible. Two specific concepts really stood out to me: Pointer Networks and V-trace off-policy correction . I was also impressed by their use of an LSTM core to handle long-term memory. Next Steps Moving forward, I plan to leverage Kaggle, AWS, and GCP credits to train different components of my model. I am giving myself total freedom to experiment, imagine, and test unconventional solutions. Random life update to close out the week: I used to have long hair because I was insecure about my forehead, but I finally decided to shave it all off at home by myself. It honestly feels really weird right now, but it's a fresh start!

submitted by /u/esporx [link] [留言]

On August 19, Startup Battlefield is returning to Sydney in partnership with Stripe, one of the world's most iconic technology companies. We're taking over Stripe Tour Sydney for a night that the Australian startup ecosystem won't forget.

These to seem to be confused and mixed up often. How do you pick those apart? submitted by /u/phamsung [link] [留言]

Meta was previously reported to be exploring facial recognition for its smart glasses.

submitted by /u/WrongdoerRough4712 [link] [留言]

Hi, everyone I am working as a Software engineer. The past few years I oversleep a little bit in scope of AI mostly because I am sceptical about it. I decided that I would like to move on and be more up to date with it and potential use of it. How do you use it in day to day habits or work? How to monetize it? submitted by /u/Blvckhype [link] [留言]

Musk can't be trusted to protect X user privacy, public commenters warn FTC.

For those doing heavy AI programming or running local models on mobile hardware: Is the current generation of iPhone Pro or Samsung Galaxy Ultra actually making a difference in your workflow, or is it mostly a gimmick right now? submitted by /u/Spirited_Good9789 [link] [留言]

On Uncanny Valley, we dive into the IPO bonanza that the top AI companies are embarking on to the point where some real estate listings are looking for not just regular old cash, but Anthropic stock.

We've poured hundreds of billions into bigger models, bigger clusters, bigger training runs, all pointed at AGI. And yet: the model still rebuilds context every few turns, still forgets what you told it ten messages ago, still degrades over long horizons. The capability is staggering and the continuity is brittle. We keep making the pattern-matcher bigger and acting surprised when a bigger pattern-matcher is still a pattern-matcher. Start with the measurement problem, because it sets up everything else. Faster output and better output are not the same thing. The industry measures speed. Tokens per second, FLOPs, parameters, because speed is easy to measure. But *effective* output, the useful work you actually get before the model starts reconstructing or fabricating what it already knew, is a different axis entirely. And on that axis, raw hardware speed tells you almost nothing. A system that generates twice as fast but burns half its output re-establishing context it should have retained isn't ahead. We've been optimizing the number that's easy to read instead of the one that matters. Here's the part I think gets skipped entirely. Current systems have no intrinsic drive. They don't want anything. They sit idle until prompted and optimize the next token. A bacterium has more impetus than a frontier model, it has a goal (find food, avoid toxin) and acts on it unprompted. That's not intelligence, it's drive, and drive is the thing evolution built *first*, hundreds of millions of years before cognition. We built the cortex and skipped the brainstem. So the bet that "scale the transformer until AGI falls out" may be optimizing the wrong layer entirely. You can't scale your way into goal-generation if goal-generation isn't a function of scale. If genuine intelligence needs a motivational substrate, something that forms its own goals and acts on them, then no cluster on earth produces it by getting larger, because it's an architecture problem, not a compute problem. That

Bittensor pays roughly eight dollars in TAO token emissions for every dollar of real AI revenue that flows through the network. The exact ratio fluctuates by quarter, but the shape is durable. Q1 2026: about $328 million in annual emissions against $43 million in real AI revenue. That is 7.6 to 1. It is what the crypto-skeptical press has called "extractive by default." It is also what the crypto-friendly analysts call "the subsidy treadmill." The Bittensor engineering team is sophisticated. The subnet validators run real ML evaluation. The miners serve real inference. The revenue is real. The emissions are also real. The cause is the token model itself. One asset is asked to do two jobs that do not belong together. I want to be specific about this part, because every other decentralized AI compute network I have looked at has the same problem, and the fix is well-known. What the token does A token in a decentralized AI compute network does two structurally distinct things. The first job is utility settlement . Contributors run inference, and someone has to pay them for the compute work they did. The payment medium has to scale with usage, has to be denominated in something the contributor can spend on the network or convert to fiat, and has to remain stable enough that contributors can plan around it. This is a billing system. The second job is value capture . Early supporters, investors, and contributors take risk to bootstrap a network that does not yet exist. They have to be paid back for that risk in a way that scales with the eventual success of the network. The payment medium has to be a speculative asset that appreciates as the network grows. This is an equity instrument. A billing system and an equity instrument want opposite things. A billing system that is also a speculative asset means that contributors who get paid in it cannot help but hold a speculative position. An equity instrument that is also a billing system means that token-price volatility show

How I combined spaced repetition, adaptive algorithms, and clean UX to create a multi-purpose learning tool. I’ve always believed that memorisation doesn’t have to feel like a chore. After years of using (and sometimes getting frustrated with) existing tools, I decided to build my own. That’s how MemOrLearn was born in early 2026. MemOrLearn is a web-based adaptive learning platform that brings together flashcards, typing practice, math drills, and Bible memory tools — all powered by intelligent spaced repetition and performance-based adaptation. The Core Idea: Most flashcard apps follow a rigid spaced repetition schedule. I wanted something smarter — a system that actually adapts to the user in real time. If a learner is struggling with a concept, the algorithm increases review frequency and offers slight variations. If they’re crushing it, reviews are intelligently spaced out. This dynamic approach is what makes the experience feel responsive and human. Key Features: Adaptive Flashcards: The heart of the platform. Users can create decks or browse public ones. The system tracks performance per card and automatically adjusts difficulty and frequency. Clean, fast, and minimal interface — exactly how I like my tools as a developer. Typing Tutor: Built to help users improve speed and accuracy through gamified, adaptive drills. It adjusts to your current level so you’re always progressing. Math Drills: Focused practice on math facts with real-time adaptation. The system identifies weak areas quickly and targets them without wasting time on mastered content. Bible Memory Mode: A specialized tool many users love. It applies the same adaptive principles to Scripture memorization, making it effective for individuals, families, and small groups. Teacher / Parent Dashboard: A clean admin view that lets educators assign work, monitor progress, and adjust settings per student. Built with simplicity in mind. Technical Approach (For Fellow Builders): I focused on keeping the back

Hey all. Been vibe coding for almost 2 years now (I think?). Previously was more focused on traditional micro-saas but recently decided to go in a different direction and see how far I could push lovable and try and make a commercial grade browser based game. Built it with Lovable + Supabase + Stripe -- full commercial browser game, gyroscope controls on mobile, no app store needed. Generated all my assets (I know, I know, there aren't a ton) with a combination of Gemini to prototype and the GPT 2 to finalize. I've made a few small games here and there that generally only get used by my kiddos, but with this one I wanted to try and create a full gaming experience (login rewards, leaderboard, store, powerup mechanics, simulated ads, etc.) Put a $100 bounty on it for the first player to reach level 100 on mobile. Nobody has claimed it since launch. So genuinely asking -- is it too hard, or is that the point? tiltra.io P.S. It is currently playable on both desktop and mobile but with the gyro mechanic it is definitely more fun and challenging on mobile. submitted by /u/BeltwayBro [link] [留言]

Opus 4.6 or sonnet 4.6 for rping Currently running on pro right now Im unsure what to choose between the two in terms of rping cause i prefer creative writing, stay in character, deep emotional prose, good character development, good memory, good character emotionals and stuff like that So far im using opus 4.6 but it drains the limits relatively quick For the sonnet i can use for hours and still be fine So like im wondering which is better for rping? I havent tested both deeply Also if they're an even better option, pls tell me. submitted by /u/Turbulent_Arrival_55 [link] [留言]

Gartner updated their 2026 forecast to $2.5 trillion in global AI spending. Same week, MIT's NANDA Initiative dropped a follow-up: 95% of enterprise gen AI projects deliver zero measurable return. Not low return. Zero. I've been on the delivery side of 14 of these projects since January. The MIT number doesn't surprise me. If anything it's generous. 1. 73% of the engineering work that gets AI into production has nothing to do with the model. Data pipelines, integration layers, legacy system remediation, human-in-the-loop tooling. That's where the hours go. The model is 27% of the work but gets 70%+ of the budget. Every time. 2. The budget ratio between projects that ship and projects that stall is almost exactly inverted. We tracked this through ticket history and commit logs across 14 engagements. Projects that made it to production: roughly 30% model, 70% infrastructure. Projects that stalled: 70% model, 30% infrastructure. Most companies think they're at 50/50. They're not even close. 3. One client went from 71% Copilot adoption to 34% in six months. Two other AI platform licenses dropped under 12%. Combined licensing: $340K/year. The tools worked fine. Nobody redesigned workflows to actually use them. 4. The median data error rate across our engagements is 14%. Teams always guess 5-10%. One client found 23% in month four of a $310K build. That's two months of an ML engineer building training pipelines against garbage data. $36K in salary discovering a problem a data audit would have caught in a week. 5. Medtech company. Four concurrent AI pilots. No kill criteria. $920K in engineer salary. Eleven months. Shipped: nothing. I've now seen this at six companies now. Nobody defines when to stop spending. So nobody stops. 6. Individual gains are real. Company-level ROI stays flat. HCLTech and Writer both found this from different angles. Only 29% of companies see significant ROI from gen AI, despite people at their desks reporting productivity jumps as high as 5x. I m

I have been researching how startups and developers manage AI spending across OpenAI, Claude, Gemini and other models. Many people seem to rely on spreadsheets, rough estimates or provider dashboards. I'm curious: How are you tracking AI costs today? What is the biggest frustration in your workflow? Trying to understand the problem space better before building additional features. submitted by /u/OneDisastrous7969 [link] [留言]

A new documentary chronicles how the app became a stand-in for American anxieties about social media, China, and political power.

As an ML researcher, how do you use AI tools in your daily work? Do you mostly use them to clean up grammar and wording, or also to rewrite, structure, or draft technical text? submitted by /u/Hope999991 [link] [留言]