与「interview」相关的搜索结果

🚨 BREAKING: Apple filed for a PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION against OpenAI AND asked a federal judge to put them under forensic supervision "Apple respectfully moves the Court for a preliminary injunction to stop THE THEFT OF ITS TRADE SECRETS" Apple filed NINE sworn declarations, a 28-page memorandum and a concurrent motion for expedited discovery What Apple now says, under oath: Chang Liu: 8 years at Apple, now OpenAI "Member of Technical Staff" exploited an authentication bug to steal Apple trade secrets "on AT LEAST FIVE SEPARATE OCCASIONS" from February to April 2026, WHILE working for OpenAI Liu downloaded "THOUSANDS OF PAGES of Apple's most sensitive trade secrets" The stolen files, NAMED: >DisplayNotes.key — "several hundred pages" on Apple's custom display power development program >Architecture analyses. Fabrication decisions. Testing results >Engineering data for an UNANNOUNCED Apple product: 'touch, display, and power systems" >Final.key + V2.key — compilations of two undisclosed Apple R&D projects >and those are "only four of the dozens of proprietary documents Mr. Liu stole" Liu fed OpenAI "a steady stream of Apple proprietary information that he actively concealed" Liu also "coached Yu-Ting "Alyssa" Peng, then still INSIDE Apple, how to access and copy files from Apple workstations "to avoid trouble with the security team" and directed her to communicate with him on the encrypted LINE app "to avoid detection" Tang Yew Tan: 24-year Apple VP, now OpenAI's Chief Hardware Officer, "used an Apple internal project codename for an unannounced product to elicit still more trade secrets from job candidates." Tan's own messages, quoted in the motion: >"Just like last time, bring some parts you worked on" >"mlb, battery, shields type of stuff is interesting" OpenAI recruiter, quoted: "No, you won't sign anything at the exit interview. If they do ask you to sign anything, let me know asap." APPLE TOLD FEDERAL JUDGE: >"OpenAI knows its misappropriation is wrong and has tried to conceal it." >"This is not a case of 'mere hiring'... it is a case of repeated instances of deliberate theft." Apple says OpenAI went after its SUPPLIERS: >OpenAI "directed a trusted Apple partner [name redacted] to perform [Apple's proprietary metal finishing] process for them, knowing it was proprietary to Apple... because they were involved in this partnership while at Apple." Apple put its own Surface Finishing Manager, Jackie Hughes, under oath to prove it. Apple named ELEVEN MORE former Apple employees at OpenAI — beyond Liu, Tan, and Peng — Fourteen people total. Apple also filed a concurrent motion for EXPEDITED DISCOVERY demanding depositions: - Liu. Tan. Peng. - A fourth unnamed OpenAI employee - Plus OpenAI itself, under oath, through Rule 30(b)(6) Apple has asked a federal judge to put OpenAI under forensic supervision RIGHT NOW: >Forensic inspection of ALL OpenAI devices >ALL cloud storage, Slack, email >Including anything that "previously contained" Apple data — deleted included Demanding the "first available hearing date," citing "imminent threat" to its trade secrets. APPLE: > "The harm is happening now — every day that passes without an injunction allows OpenAI to embed their knowledge of Apple's stolen information into its hardware development efforts." Hearing: October 1, 2026. Judge Edward J. Davila. ITS HAPPENING

A good research agent should't just answer a question. It should know which tool to call next. At every research workflow is carefully designed as a sequence of actions: 1. Clarify needs 2. Plan the study 3. Search personas 4. Scan social media 5. Build new AI Personas 6. Interview or run group discussions 7. Generate the research report and reusable panel Each step uses different tools to move the research forward. And the report is not the end. The Personas involved become a reusable AI Panel — a consumer asset you can return to whenever you have a new question. Validate an idea. Design a product concept. Analyze competitors. Build a go-to-market plan. One research workflow can become a reusable system for understanding the people you're building for. 👉 Start your AI research from here:

Après toutes ces vagues d’immigration en Espagne, je vais vous expliquer par A + B pourquoi une partie de la gauche a structurellement besoin de flux continus d’arrivées irrégulières pour rester au pouvoir. A. Un immigrant qui vient d’arriver via le Maroc, interviewé dans la rue par Nate Friedman, répond sans détour : une fois papiers obtenus, il votera socialiste toute sa vie. Pas par idéologie profonde. Par rationalité simple : le parti qui régularise, qui donne accès aux aides, qui parle « droits », devient le clientèle naturelle. B. Les électeurs natifs, eux, commencent à voir le coût (logement, écoles, sécurité, cohésion). L’IA accélère brutalement cette prise de conscience. Les narratifs émotionnels qui ont fonctionné pendant 40-50 ans (division, victimisation permanente, « si tu critiques tu es méchant ») perdent de leur puissance quand tout le monde peut croiser les données en deux clics. Résultat mécanique : plus les gens comprennent le deal, plus il faut importer de nouveaux électeurs fidèles pour compenser ceux qui partent. C’est de l’arithmétique électorale pure. On l’a vu aux États-Unis malgré la victoire de Trump. On le voit en train de se rejouer en Europe. Ce n’est pas une question de « haine des étrangers ». La plupart des gens qui arrivent réagissent rationnellement aux incentives qu’on leur met sous le nez. Le vrai problème, c’est l’idée politique qui transforme l’immigration en machine à clientèle permanente plutôt qu’en processus d’intégration exigeant et sélectif. Les mauvaises idées ne détruisent pas seulement les sociétés. Elles finissent par détruire d’abord ceux qui les portent : la confiance s’érode, la polarisation explose, les crises s’enchaînent. Si les peuples européens ne reprennent pas le contrôle de cette dynamique très vite, on se dirige vers des sociétés de plus en plus fragmentées, à basse confiance, où la seule collure qui reste est la redistribution clientéliste. L’histoire montre que ce genre de trajectoire ne se termine rarement bien. Mais on n’est pas condamnés. L’IA retire les piliers de l’opacité. X retire le monopole narratif. La reconversion est toujours possible. Le 21e siècle appartiendra à ceux qui construisent des sociétés à haute confiance, pas à ceux qui diluent sans cesse le capital social pour sauver un pouvoir. À nous de choisir.

Hats off to doctoral student and podcaster Zhong Shu in Beijing, China, who did this fascinating and smart interview with Christopher Nolan about THE ODYSSEY yesterday, originally posted to Bilibili. A great listen/watch.