reMarkable is doing a decent job, their first generation device launched in 2017. Still getting updates. It is discontinued for sale, but there is no reason to believe reMarkable will stop updating their other devices if they're _still_ updating a device they don't even sell anymore.
On top of that, their aftermarket and open source situation is pretty good.
They're not ideal e-readers though, but if you're in the market for a good e-ink device with long-term support and that works well with calibre? Might be worth a look.
until the software compatibility with the older model compromises the newer models. Kudos for them for still updating a device no longer on sale, but Apple does the same, until it doesn't. The fact that they are still updating the first generation today does not mean they will do so tomorrow.
I was researching how to predict hallucinations using the literature (fastowski et al, 2025) (cecere et al, 2025) and the general-ish situation is that there are ways to introspect model certainty levels by probing it from the outside to get the same certainty metric that you _would_ have gotten if the model was trained as a bayesian model, ie, it knows what it knows and it knows what it doesn't know.
This significantly improves claim-level false-positive rates (which is measured with the AUARC metric, ie, abstention rates; ie have the model shut up when it is actually uncertain).
This would be great to include as a metric in benchmarks because right now the benchmark just says "it solves x% of benchmarks", whereas the real question real-world developers care about is "it solves x% of benchmarks *reliably*" AND "It creates false positives on y% of the time".
So the answer to your question, we don't know. It might be a cherry picked result, it might be fewer hallucinations (better metacognition) it might be capability to solve more difficult problems (better intelligence).
I wrote a program that has programmable brushes about ten years ago, it's a bit different from moss in that it has a physics simulation underneath rather than a sort of shader, but I've always thought this kind of approach has a lot of potential.
It feels _amazing_ to draw a bird in a single stroke!
This was very interesting to read! My choice of drawing program now is Rebelle, which does have a "swarm" brush (they call them bristle brushes, designed to emulate real paintbrushes) and together with its physical simulation where paint applied on the canvas has a thickness instead of opacity, the results can look absolutely stunning. Have given me the itch to also experiment with simulation-based drawing programs.
I mean you get a random game in the authors example :)
But in real life you do not want a random game. That's what I mean, you need the great scaffolding + exact requirements. Then the prompt to do the implementation does not matter too much.
If I understand the author correctly, he chose the hyperbolic model specifically because the story of "the singularity" _requires_ a function that hits infinity.
He's looking for a model that works for the story in the media and runs with it.
Your criticism seems to be criticizing the story, not the author's attempt to take it "seriously"
On top of that, their aftermarket and open source situation is pretty good.
They're not ideal e-readers though, but if you're in the market for a good e-ink device with long-term support and that works well with calibre? Might be worth a look.
reply