I don’t understand the approach

> TADA takes a different path. Instead of compressing audio into fewer fixed-rate frames of discrete audio tokens, we align audio representations directly to text tokens — one continuous acoustic vector per text token. This creates a single, synchronized stream where text and speech move in lockstep through the language model.

So basically just concatenating the audio vectors without compression or discretization?

I haven’t read the full paper yet (I know, I should before commenting), but this explanation puzzles me.

German here. Some of it I can agree with. The traffic light though is very simple. Yellow means “it was green and will turn red”. Red+yellow means “it was red and will turn green”.

It’s this way in the entire country. There are many things I can get upset with in Germany (I moved abroad 10y ago and have an outsider’s perspective by now) but the traffic light example to me just indicates you didn’t ask why certain things were the way they were.

The only monitor on the market of this size and resolution that I am aware of that has really high brightness and works well when I work outside on the terrace.

Really glad Apple is building it.

Well, they did stand up to the US administration and lost a lot of money in the process. That takes courage. They clearly were being bullied into compliance, and they stood their ground.

You can see the significance of this is you look at German Nazi history. If more companies had stood up to the administration, the Nazi state would have been significantly harder to build.

In my opinion, what Anthropic did is not a small thing at all.

I tried it as well with a contrarian view on UBI. I think the UBI one is a great test case. If you’re against the idea you will likely argue that it is idealistic and that in the real world it would create bad incentives.

So basically you end up arguing for a darker, more pessimistic world view, and that tends to get flagged very quickly by the tool right now. I think you should fix that. It’s a mistake in modern discussions to be overly positive; HN feels real because people can leave pretty harsh critiques. It just has to be well argued. Don’t raise the bar for well-argued too high though, because nobody’s perfect.

Anyway, I love the idea and really hope you’ll succeed. Hope my feedback has been somewhat helpful.