I mean that's pretty standard for a McKinsey ghoul:
Step 1: go to an ivy league college, get a business degree
Step 2: work for McKinsey for a few years as an associate
Step 3: get a job at a McKinsey client leapfrogging everyone else into management/c-suite
Step 4: hire McKinsey to bring their arrogant children into your org and screw things up
Everything about her subsequent career has been going from one upper management/c-suite role in a tech company to another. This is not the resume of a person who should be running a nonprofit that controls the most important open source project on the internet. But beyond that just look at what she's done in her one month at Mozilla:
Massive round of layoffs
"Focus on {buzzword}" where {buzzword} in this case is AI
I remember what happened last time. Gradually the web will become unusable if you're not using Chrome. That's how it worked back in the day with Internet Explorer. Microsoft even began hooking things into IE that can only work on windows (activex controls) and then getting websites to support them.
When I first started using Linux I had to switch to Netscape 4.7 because it was the only browser available and the web barely worked. I remember thinking "well, the web sucks on Linux but I guess I can live without it."
This is daft though considering that he needs Michigan and the Muslim voters in were one of the Democratic pillars in that state, and he has completely and possibly irrevocably alienated them.
Yep Americans have a choice between the party that aggressively cheerleads and gloats while doing everything in their power to enable Israeli war crimes, and the party that "expresses concerns" and "calls for moderation" while doing everything in their power to enable Israeli war crimes.
I think for like ten minutes they were vetting people joining or something, and the answers were high quality. But the whole thing turned into yahoo answers within a month of it getting popular.
The crowd cheered at the first two items, but had no real idea why the third item was such a big deal.
I'm not sure, I took that to mean a competitor to Palm, which was pretty popular among a niche segment of the population. Although data plans via 3G kinda sucked back then and most Palm users I knew were constantly trying to connect to wifi.
VR has been around in modern form for more than a decade and the only truly novel and useful application is some types of gameplay.
Apple claims that the future is AR but the only novel and useful application is feeding you more ads. This is a massive benefit for them, but not a reason for anyone to buy this thing and subject themselves to it.
On the other hand, we’d been trying to do anything useful with natural language since the 50’s and had thoroughly failed.
That's really not true. For instance, machine translation and spam detection (document classification) were getting really good by the late 2000s. Image recognition was great beginning the late 2010s.
What we've seen in the last few years (besides continual incremental improvements in already-existing solutions) is improvement in the application of generative tools. So far the uses cases of generative models appear to be violating copyright, cheating on homework, and producing even more search engine spam. It can also be somewhat useful as a search engine so long as you want your answer to be authoritatively worded but don't care if it's true or not.
Like, before smartphones I was lost in hamburg, looking at a paper map trying to figure out where the heck I was, trying to find the street names hidden in the brickwork of the buildings. I had to have a friendly person help me out. I've never been lost like that since smartphones. Give me a specific case where chatgpt would do something like that.
The fundamental problem with tech in the 2020s is that it's pretty much done eating the world. The last big earth-moving platform shift was smartphones over a decade ago. Ever since they've just been trying to make wearables happen, then make VR/AR happen, then make web3 happen, then make AI happen.
They keep on trying to make these new platforms happen but they don't really have any compelling features. Before smartphones when I'd travel to a new city I'd buy a paper map.. and get lost. I don't get lost anymore. That's genuinely a different experience. Nothing since has created any sort of earth shattering change on that level.
If the AR floating windows/screens work as they advertise, then it replaces 1-2-3 screens, in whatever configuration you want them in.
Right but how much does a screen cost these days? (I guess the apple ones are still absurdly expensive, are they still charging $1000 for a monitor stand?)
Also I doubt that these things work anywhere like that. The resolution is nowhere near good enough. Also I've worn the quest and your face gets sweaty pretty quickly. The weight on the front of your head is very noticeable, and they give you headaches after a while if you don't get sick first. They can be fun for the right types of gameplay but that's it.
Also, SV doesn't really care about VR gaming. What they really care about is AR, and they care about it because they want to put advertisements like everywhere. Every building: Ads all over it, Every wall in your house: Ads everywhere. Every interaction with your loved ones: Ads. This is the future they dream about, but it sucks and they have never come up with any real reason for us to put their face huggers on.
I mean that's pretty standard for a McKinsey ghoul:
Everything about her subsequent career has been going from one upper management/c-suite role in a tech company to another. This is not the resume of a person who should be running a nonprofit that controls the most important open source project on the internet. But beyond that just look at what she's done in her one month at Mozilla:
That's straight out of the McKinsey playbook.