No they're right. Regardless if one agrees with you or not, doesn't change the fact that your behavior was that of an asshole. I would know since I'm one too.

Task a squirrel with agreeing with the behavior of a fox, but from the biomolecular level. That is the level of the asshole you are setting out.

Agreed. Nothing wrong with charging for a product.

You are paying with your data already.

Even in public?

Yes. The issue with Meta glasses and those pendants are that they are designed for concealment, designed to invade the privacy of other people. Some might argue that mobile phones can also be used to make secret recordings. However, they are not primarily designed for this and it is a side-effect of being a multifunctional tool. However, whenever anyone uses Meta glasses or their pendants in public, one should assume that they may behave maliciously and take appropriate action against such ppeople. Those people will only learn if we collectively decide that punching and breaking their stupid glasses is the right way to handle this.

> Some might argue that mobile phones can also be used to make secret recordings

Not to mention that doing so is a felony in a two-party consent state.

What kind of worse case scenario is running through your mind to be this upset? Not saying it doesn't exist I just would like to know.

You say the wrong thing, wear the wrong thing, look disheveled or whatever and the asshole with the KGB glasses records it. Then MoistCunt (always forget the real name) on Twitch makes a "reaction video" and 35 million of his dumb minions hate you forever if you dare to appear on the Internet.

$400 a month is a lot to you?

For something of the equivalent of surprise Pokemon cards, anything above $0 is too much.

I mean, Pokemon cards aren’t cheap either.

> Mozilla found and fixed 271 vulnerabilities in Firefox 150 while testing Mythos Preview—over ten times more than they found in Firefox 148 with Claude Opus 4.6

4.6 but close.

Right, but were they using the same methodology and harness? I'm skeptical that they're doing something with the harness - i.e. with Mythos, they pass each file in one at a time, whereas on 4.6 they let Claude Code run loose to find bugs. This would have a larger impact difference than the model itself.

Yes, the harness they used actually existed and was in use beforehand, it wasn't developed for testing with Mythos.

From Mozilla post [1]:

"...After fixing the initial set of issues that Anthropic sent to us in February, we built our own harness atop our existing fuzzing infrastructure.

We began with small-scale experiments prompting the harness to look for sandbox escapes with Claude Opus 4.6. Even with this model, we identified an impressive amount of previously-unknown vulnerabilities which required complex reasoning over multiprocess browser engine code..."

So yeah, Anthropic and Mozilla likely compare "Amount of bugs found by Opus 4.6 during early experiments" vs "Amount of bugs found by Mythos during large-scale codebase scanning".

[1] https://hacks.mozilla.org/2026/05/behind-the-scenes-hardenin...

Universities...for a data center?

That's already factored in the cost of doing business for them.

These people don’t work for Apple or Anthropic.

Have to disagree as a father. The real benefit is the father and child who are now bonding. That doesn't mean the mother can't also bond, it just means it's not one sided.

I got to spend a bit more than 2 years doing math homework 1:1 with my youngest. Now, she's moving up to honors & gets 100% without any help. I miss all that time we got to hang out, do homework, watch videos of cats, etc.

The mother's are now working. So they're bonding less. I think that's what he means not that father's are taking away mother-child bonding time.

Except if anyone bothered to read the damn article you'd see that the research showed the highly educated were more likely to have involved fathers. Those are not going to be forced as the person seems to imply.

No that's not why.