For her first game, Regina became fully immersed in the world of Spellborne — a Web3 game with great storytelling and exploration.

Regina's Web3 Gaming Odyssey: My First Web3 Quest – Bitcoin News

The Meta Quest+ subscription is made more compelling by getting a permanent pool of VR games, similar to Game Pass.

Meta Quest+ gets more like Game Pass by adding a games catalog

Now, Meta Quest+ offers access to a rolling series of VR games, not just two new games per month, with store credit for new annual subscribers.

Meta Quest Plus' new 'catalog' of games comes with a $25 store credit incentive | Android Central

The Meta Quest+ subscription is introducing a &quot;games catalog&quot; from Friday with Demeo, Walkabout Mini Golf, Onward, and more. Details here:

Meta Quest+ Adds Games Catalog With Demeo, Walkabout & More

Quest

quest

Charles Dray is founder and CEO of Resonance Security, a full-spectrum cybersecurity suite of software and services that aims to integrate essential traditional and emerging offensive and defensive security practices into a single platform in order to protect companies and individuals against any and all threats that emerge, either from the existing internet or its future iterations. In this interview with Jillian Godsil, he shares his insights and experience running Resonance Security. What is your company in 2–5 words? Full spectrum effortless cybersecurity. Why is now the time for your company to exist? Cybersecurity threats continue to evolve and target larger audiences. Victims lose an estimated 714 Billion to cybercrime annually and it will increase with emerging technology threats. What do you love about your team, and why are you the ones to solve this problem? We focus on delivering an impactful experience we want organizations and individuals to be proud of using. Every single person on the team is highly passionate about our purpose, and we have the experience to back it. Our security team has a proven track record with defensive and offensive cybersecurity across institutions, small businesses, web3, and consumers. We’ve seen what’s out there and know we found the solution. If you weren’t building your startup, what would you be doing? I’d still be involved in cybersecurity and emerging tech, and I’d be thinking about another way to effectively make people safer from attacks which could ruin their lives and mental health. At the moment, how do you measure success? What are your metrics? I measure success through analyzing customer feedback, and reviewing how many customers end up being sales people. There’s a saying that says “your customer is your best sales person” and I believe it is spot on. In a few sentences, what do you offer to whom? Effortless, effective, and evolving cybersecurity software solutions for institutions, small businesses, web3, VIPs, and consumers. A solution for any circumstance, budget, and any technical level. What’s most exciting about your traction to date? We’ve enrolled customers in every vertical and received positive feedback from 100% of our customers since March of 2023! It’s an incredibly rewarding experience to see that the business model is working better then we could have ever imagined – I feel that giving each customer a human experience is a big part of it. Knowing they have a team of security experts on their side setting them up for success drives betterment on so many levels. Where do you think your growth will be next year? I see significant growth in the consumer, small business, and web3 segment in the next year. These segments are well served in the identity theft (for consumers) and testing market (for small businesses and web3), but are very exposed from an advanced full spectrum offensive and defensive security standpoint. It’s hard to build a team and software that can deliver those solutions truly effectively, so no one has really approached that market. For years, we have developed a playbook that effectively covers any audience. Our team of red team engineers and software builders are exclusive to Resonance and are driven by the passion to protect. Tell us about your first paying customer and revenue expectations over the next year. Our first paying customer was back in March of 2023. It was a COSMWASM Rust code audit for a money transfer project. Our experience with emerging tech originates from our background in traditional cybersecurity, so projects are delighted to work with engineers that know how to tie together legacy technologies with emerging technologies and detect attack vectors of both technologies together. We reached nearly seven figures in Revenue our first year when we were in software beta mode. With the inflow of organizations and individuals starting to take security seriously we are on track to be at eight figures in the next year, and that’s mostly software revenue. What’s your biggest threat? That organizations and individuals don’t take cybersecurity seriously enough, and come to us later in a much less favorable situation after a hack rather than starting to take the proper actions today. It’s always sad to see how unwell people become after a major cybersecurity attack. Cybersecurity attacks make people loose trust in other people, and that’s never a good thing for mental health. Charles Dray is founder and CEO of Resonance Security, a full-spectrum cybersecurity suite of software and services that aims to integrate essential traditional and emerging offensive and defensive security practices into a single platform in order to protect companies and individuals against any and all threats that emerge, either from the existing internet or its future iterations. In this interview with Jillian Godsil, he shares his insights and experience running Resonance Security. What is your company in 2–5 words? What is your company in 2–5 words? Full spectrum effortless cybersecurity. Why is now the time for your company to exist? Why is now the time for your company to exist? Cybersecurity threats continue to evolve and target larger audiences. Victims lose an estimated 714 Billion to cybercrime annually and it will increase with emerging technology threats. What do you love about your team, and why are you the ones to solve this problem? What do you love about your team, and why are you the ones to solve this problem? We focus on delivering an impactful experience we want organizations and individuals to be proud of using. Every single person on the team is highly passionate about our purpose, and we have the experience to back it. Our security team has a proven track record with defensive and offensive cybersecurity across institutions, small businesses, web3, and consumers. We’ve seen what’s out there and know we found the solution. If you weren’t building your startup, what would you be doing? If you weren’t building your startup, what would you be doing? I’d still be involved in cybersecurity and emerging tech, and I’d be thinking about another way to effectively make people safer from attacks which could ruin their lives and mental health. At the moment, how do you measure success? What are your metrics? At the moment, how do you measure success? What are your metrics? I measure success through analyzing customer feedback, and reviewing how many customers end up being sales people. There’s a saying that says “your customer is your best sales person” and I believe it is spot on. In a few sentences, what do you offer to whom? In a few sentences, what do you offer to whom? Effortless, effective, and evolving cybersecurity software solutions for institutions, small businesses, web3, VIPs, and consumers. A solution for any circumstance, budget, and any technical level. What’s most exciting about your traction to date? What’s most exciting about your traction to date? We’ve enrolled customers in every vertical and received positive feedback from 100% of our customers since March of 2023! It’s an incredibly rewarding experience to see that the business model is working better then we could have ever imagined – I feel that giving each customer a human experience is a big part of it. Knowing they have a team of security experts on their side setting them up for success drives betterment on so many levels. Where do you think your growth will be next year? Where do you think your growth will be next year? I see significant growth in the consumer, small business, and web3 segment in the next year. These segments are well served in the identity theft (for consumers) and testing market (for small businesses and web3), but are very exposed from an advanced full spectrum offensive and defensive security standpoint. It’s hard to build a team and software that can deliver those solutions truly effectively, so no one has really approached that market. For years, we have developed a playbook that effectively covers any audience. Our team of red team engineers and software builders are exclusive to Resonance and are driven by the passion to protect. Tell us about your first paying customer and revenue expectations over the next year. Tell us about your first paying customer and revenue expectations over the next year. Our first paying customer was back in March of 2023. It was a COSMWASM Rust code audit for a money transfer project. Our experience with emerging tech originates from our background in traditional cybersecurity, so projects are delighted to work with engineers that know how to tie together legacy technologies with emerging technologies and detect attack vectors of both technologies together. We reached nearly seven figures in Revenue our first year when we were in software beta mode. With the inflow of organizations and individuals starting to take security seriously we are on track to be at eight figures in the next year, and that’s mostly software revenue. What’s your biggest threat? What’s your biggest threat? That organizations and individuals don’t take cybersecurity seriously enough, and come to us later in a much less favorable situation after a hack rather than starting to take the proper actions today. It’s always sad to see how unwell people become after a major cybersecurity attack. Cybersecurity attacks make people loose trust in other people, and that’s never a good thing for mental health.

10 Questions for Cybersecurity Firm Resonance Founder Charles Dray

I’ve been working in IT for 10 years, and for the past 5 years as a Lead Developer. I’ve conducted over 100 technical interviews for various projects and technologies. I think, that Interviews often says more about the interviewer than about the actual project and what tasks you would be assigned. It’s frustrating when interviewers ask questions like “How do you handle memory leaks in a browser?” or “What project metrics should be tracked?” Then, for a long time, you working on building web forms and changing button colors 🙃 Target Audience I do not recommend this article for people who are preparing for interviews, because most interviews focus on a lot of theory that doesn’t really relate to the project or work you’ll actually do. I hope this will be interesting for those looking for an optimal way to conduct interviews and find the best candidates in the market. This rules and questions were defined after a big amount of hiring bad specialists, that perform really bad on the project. As for now, I can be sure that using this questions, even if candidate know before interview them, I will understand if I can work with this person and will the candidate be able to handle the project tasks. Interview Rules Ask Only What You Need to Know Make the PLAN! You should understand why you hire someone and what this person would do on project. If you’re hiring someone just to write HTML/CSS, ask relevant questions. You probably expect them to analyse requirements before implementation. Your goal is to hire someone who can work independently, so don’t waste time explaining every detail of what they need to do. If you need a candidate that will change the build process on you project and split application into microfrontends, then it ok if candidate has some gaps in css, when specific tasks would be ended you can hire a new one or upskill your teammate. Don’t Ask What Can Be Googled It’s strange to hear questions like “What does function X do?” or “How many JavaScript types are there?” If the candidate doesn’t know the latest features like private methods or symbols in JS, it’s usually not a reason to reject them, until you are banned in google or ChatGPT and all your teammates are junior developers. Ensure the Candidate is Ready to Learn the Project Stack Sometimes it’s critical, like if you’re hiring a backend developer for a project with a SQL database but no ORM. In that case, SQL knowledge is essential. However, if you’re using Firebase, SQL might not matter. If a candidate has some backend experience, give them 1-2 days to learn Firebase. It hard to find candidate that will match all your project skill set, especially when project exists for more then 5 years. Evaluate How Candidates Think Nobody knows everything, but some people are quick learners and adaptable. I prefer hiring people who show a willingness to learn and grow. It better to understand if candidate can solve complicated tasks or will rather give up on easy one. If their knowledge covers at least 70% of what you need, check if they can learn new tools, solve complex problems, and apply their skills. Remember the candidate level It not relevant to ask junior developer: how to setup datadog dashboard and what metrics to collect. As for me, I have following expectations from candidates level: Junior Developer: Has good theoretical knowledge and can apply it in practice. Has limited practical experience;
Software Developer: Can work independently on most tasks. Has solid practical experience for at least one year;
Senior Developer: Should have strong and deep technical knowledge and be able to mentor junior developers. Ideally capable of creating good solution designs. Has good communication skills;
Lead Developer: Similar to a senior developer but can also manage the team. In my view, they should also act as a junior architect and junior project manager, supporting both the PM and architect effectively. Ask Simple Theory Questions I’m not a fan of theory, but I do ask basic questions to ensure candidates understand the main tech stack. For example: For a React position: •	How does change detection work in React?

•	How do you use useState and useEffect?

•	What’s the difference between props and state? For an Angular position: •	How does change detection work, and what strategy do you use?

•	Can you explain the component lifecycle?

•	What is two-way data binding, and what is @Input? Once candidates show a basic understanding, I might ask more advanced questions based on the project’s specific needs. Practical Coding Tasks I’ve heard complaints about coding during interviews, but I’ve found it helpful. Remember to help candidate to keep calm if candidate got too nervous! Part 0: Using the Console I often start by asking the candidate to download a project from GitHub. This helps me understand how they navigate the console, switch between screens, and more. Here’s what I look for: •	How they download the code – do they use an efficient method?

•	Do they check the README file for setup instructions? Part 1: Problem-Solving The first task might be to create a simple blog. •	How many questions the candidate asks – are they relevant?

•	Do they prioritize tasks effectively?

•	How is the CSS structured, and are they using best practices?

•	How do they approach the task? Do they start with a basic structure and then refine it? Part 2: Handling Challenges I also give a task to fix unit tests, which helps me see how candidates handle difficulties and work with legacy code. •	How they debug and use the console.

•	Their approach to writing unit tests. Conclusion With these tasks, I get a good understanding of how candidates think and how they use tools like the code editor, console, JavaScript, frameworks. Based on this, I decide if they’re a good fit for the team, the project and for me as a lead. I’ve been working in IT for 10 years, and for the past 5 years as a Lead Developer. I’ve conducted over 100 technical interviews for various projects and technologies. I think, that Interviews often says more about the interviewer than about the actual project and what tasks you would be assigned. It’s frustrating when interviewers ask questions like “How do you handle memory leaks in a browser?” or “What project metrics should be tracked?” Then, for a long time, you working on building web forms and changing button colors 🙃 Target Audience I do not recommend this article for people who are preparing for interviews, because most interviews focus on a lot of theory that doesn’t really relate to the project or work you’ll actually do. I hope this will be interesting for those looking for an optimal way to conduct interviews and find the best candidates in the market. This rules and questions were defined after a big amount of hiring bad specialists, that perform really bad on the project. As for now, I can be sure that using this questions, even if candidate know before interview them, I will understand if I can work with this person and will the candidate be able to handle the project tasks. Interview Rules Ask Only What You Need to Know Make the PLAN! You should understand why you hire someone and what this person would do on project. If you’re hiring someone just to write HTML/CSS, ask relevant questions. You probably expect them to analyse requirements before implementation. Your goal is to hire someone who can work independently, so don’t waste time explaining every detail of what they need to do. If you need a candidate that will change the build process on you project and split application into microfrontends, then it ok if candidate has some gaps in css, when specific tasks would be ended you can hire a new one or upskill your teammate. Don’t Ask What Can Be Googled It’s strange to hear questions like “What does function X do?” or “How many JavaScript types are there?” If the candidate doesn’t know the latest features like private methods or symbols in JS, it’s usually not a reason to reject them, until you are banned in google or ChatGPT and all your teammates are junior developers. Ensure the Candidate is Ready to Learn the Project Stack Sometimes it’s critical, like if you’re hiring a backend developer for a project with a SQL database but no ORM. In that case, SQL knowledge is essential. However, if you’re using Firebase, SQL might not matter. If a candidate has some backend experience, give them 1-2 days to learn Firebase. It hard to find candidate that will match all your project skill set, especially when project exists for more then 5 years. Evaluate How Candidates Think Nobody knows everything, but some people are quick learners and adaptable. I prefer hiring people who show a willingness to learn and grow. It better to understand if candidate can solve complicated tasks or will rather give up on easy one. If their knowledge covers at least 70% of what you need, check if they can learn new tools, solve complex problems, and apply their skills. Remember the candidate level It not relevant to ask junior developer: how to setup datadog dashboard and what metrics to collect. As for me, I have following expectations from candidates level: Junior Developer: Has good theoretical knowledge and can apply it in practice. Has limited practical experience; Software Developer: Can work independently on most tasks. Has solid practical experience for at least one year; Senior Developer: Should have strong and deep technical knowledge and be able to mentor junior developers. Ideally capable of creating good solution designs. Has good communication skills; Lead Developer: Similar to a senior developer but can also manage the team. In my view, they should also act as a junior architect and junior project manager, supporting both the PM and architect effectively. Junior Developer: Has good theoretical knowledge and can apply it in practice. Has limited practical experience; Software Developer: Can work independently on most tasks. Has solid practical experience for at least one year; Senior Developer: Should have strong and deep technical knowledge and be able to mentor junior developers. Ideally capable of creating good solution designs. Has good communication skills; Lead Developer: Similar to a senior developer but can also manage the team. In my view, they should also act as a junior architect and junior project manager, supporting both the PM and architect effectively. Ask Simple Theory Questions I’m not a fan of theory, but I do ask basic questions to ensure candidates understand the main tech stack. For example: For a React position: •	How does change detection work in React?

•	How do you use useState and useEffect?

•	What’s the difference between props and state? •	How does change detection work in React?

•	How do you use useState and useEffect?

•	What’s the difference between props and state? For an Angular position: •	How does change detection work, and what strategy do you use?

•	Can you explain the component lifecycle?

•	What is two-way data binding, and what is @Input? •	How does change detection work, and what strategy do you use?

•	Can you explain the component lifecycle?

•	What is two-way data binding, and what is @Input? Once candidates show a basic understanding, I might ask more advanced questions based on the project’s specific needs. Practical Coding Tasks I’ve heard complaints about coding during interviews, but I’ve found it helpful. Remember to help candidate to keep calm if candidate got too nervous! Remember to help candidate to keep calm if candidate got too nervous! Part 0: Using the Console I often start by asking the candidate to download a project from GitHub. This helps me understand how they navigate the console, switch between screens, and more. Here’s what I look for: •	How they download the code – do they use an efficient method?

•	Do they check the README file for setup instructions? •	How they download the code – do they use an efficient method?

•	Do they check the README file for setup instructions? Part 1: Problem-Solving The first task might be to create a simple blog. •	How many questions the candidate asks – are they relevant?

•	Do they prioritize tasks effectively?

•	How is the CSS structured, and are they using best practices?

•	How do they approach the task? Do they start with a basic structure and then refine it? •	How many questions the candidate asks – are they relevant?

•	Do they prioritize tasks effectively?

•	How is the CSS structured, and are they using best practices?

•	How do they approach the task? Do they start with a basic structure and then refine it? Part 2: Handling Challenges I also give a task to fix unit tests, which helps me see how candidates handle difficulties and work with legacy code. •	How they debug and use the console.

•	Their approach to writing unit tests. •	How they debug and use the console.

•	Their approach to writing unit tests. Conclusion With these tasks, I get a good understanding of how candidates think and how they use tools like the code editor, console, JavaScript, frameworks. Based on this, I decide if they’re a good fit for the team, the project and for me as a lead.

My Favourite Front-End Interview Question to Ask Candidates and Why

Command Line Confessions: The Embarrassing Questions I Should Have Asked Long Ago

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has found himself in the spotlight again, this time, over his charitable engagement with meme coin projects. Buterin recently acknowledged two meme coins, EBULL and MOODENG, for their charitable contributions, stating that any digital tokens sent to him would be donated to charity. This statement has sparked conversations within the crypto community, particularly regarding the potential risks for investors. Vitalik's Acknowledgment of Meme Coins In a tweet shared this week, Vitalik Buterin expressed appreciation for meme coin projects that are donating portions of their supply directly to charity. He specifically mentioned the EBULL and MOODENG tokens, acknowledging their efforts in supporting charitable causes, and noted that digital tokens sent to him would be donated. The 10 billion MOODENG tokens, for example, were directed towards anti-airborne disease technology. While Buterin's gesture appeared genuine, it did not go unnoticed by the crypto community, where questions arose regarding the impact of such public endorsements. The acknowledgment of meme coin projects that may not have undergone thorough scrutiny has raised concerns among investors and market analysts. Concerns From the Community One notable figure in the crypto space, known as Crypto Rug Muncher, who has built a reputation for exposing potential cryptocurrency scams, voiced concerns  about Buterin's actions. Crypto Rug Muncher specifically raised alarms since September this year, about the EBULL token, claiming it could be a potential scam, and is warning now that public endorsements from influential figures could inadvertently legitimize projects that may not have transparent operations and could even be fraudulent. According to Crypto Rug Muncher, the acknowledgment of EBULL meme coins contributed to a price surge in this digital token, attracting new crypto investors. However, he warned that such recognition could allow insiders to capitalize on the elevated prices by selling off their holdings, potentially leaving unsuspecting buyers with losses. Crypto Rug Muncher emphasized that charitable donations are commendable and should not come at the cost of investor safety. He argued that projects might misuse the charity angle to gain credibility and attract more investors, all while masking potentially deceptive practices. His specific concerns about the EBULL token highlight the risks of boosting projects without thorough due diligence. Ethical Questions About Promotion and Due Diligence The situation has also prompted broader discussions on the ethical responsibility of public figures and crypto platforms when promoting crypto projects, even indirectly. The crypto industry is no stranger to scams, and cryptocurrency investors often rely on the endorsements of trusted figures. This makes it critical for those with influence to exercise caution and conduct due diligence before publicly acknowledging any projects. Many in the community believe that even charitable gestures can have unintended consequences, especially if the promoted projects turn out to be fraudulent. The key question that arises is: Should influential figures be more cautious when accepting tokens for charity from projects that may not have undergone proper vetting? Conclusion Vitalik Buterin's recent actions have brought to light the delicate balance between supporting charitable causes and maintaining investor trust. While Buterin's intentions may have been noble, the reaction from the community underscores the importance of thorough due diligence, even when engaging in charity. As the crypto market continues to evolve, transparency and caution are essential to prevent any unintended harm to investors. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has found himself in the spotlight again, this time, over his charitable engagement with meme coin projects. Buterin recently acknowledged two meme coins, EBULL and MOODENG, for their charitable contributions, stating that any digital tokens sent to him would be donated to charity. This statement has sparked conversations within the crypto community, particularly regarding the potential risks for investors. Vitalik's Acknowledgment of Meme Coins In a tweet shared this week, Vitalik Buterin expressed appreciation for meme coin projects that are donating portions of their supply directly to charity. He specifically mentioned the EBULL and MOODENG tokens, acknowledging their efforts in supporting charitable causes, and noted that digital tokens sent to him would be donated. The 10 billion MOODENG tokens, for example, were directed towards anti-airborne disease technology. tweet While Buterin's gesture appeared genuine, it did not go unnoticed by the crypto community, where questions arose regarding the impact of such public endorsements. The acknowledgment of meme coin projects that may not have undergone thorough scrutiny has raised concerns among investors and market analysts. Concerns From the Community One notable figure in the crypto space, known as Crypto Rug Muncher, who has built a reputation for exposing potential cryptocurrency scams, voiced concerns about Buterin's actions. Crypto Rug Muncher specifically raised alarms since September this year, about the EBULL token, claiming it could be a potential scam, and is warning now that public endorsements from influential figures could inadvertently legitimize projects that may not have transparent operations and could even be fraudulent. voiced concerns According to Crypto Rug Muncher, the acknowledgment of EBULL meme coins contributed to a price surge in this digital token, attracting new crypto investors. However, he warned that such recognition could allow insiders to capitalize on the elevated prices by selling off their holdings, potentially leaving unsuspecting buyers with losses. Crypto Rug Muncher emphasized that charitable donations are commendable and should not come at the cost of investor safety. He argued that projects might misuse the charity angle to gain credibility and attract more investors, all while masking potentially deceptive practices. His specific concerns about the EBULL token highlight the risks of boosting projects without thorough due diligence. Ethical Questions About Promotion and Due Diligence The situation has also prompted broader discussions on the ethical responsibility of public figures and crypto platforms when promoting crypto projects, even indirectly. The crypto industry is no stranger to scams, and cryptocurrency investors often rely on the endorsements of trusted figures. This makes it critical for those with influence to exercise caution and conduct due diligence before publicly acknowledging any projects. broader discussions Many in the community believe that even charitable gestures can have unintended consequences, especially if the promoted projects turn out to be fraudulent. The key question that arises is: Should influential figures be more cautious when accepting tokens for charity from projects that may not have undergone proper vetting? Conclusion Vitalik Buterin's recent actions have brought to light the delicate balance between supporting charitable causes and maintaining investor trust. While Buterin's intentions may have been noble, the reaction from the community underscores the importance of thorough due diligence, even when engaging in charity. As the crypto market continues to evolve, transparency and caution are essential to prevent any unintended harm to investors.

Vitalik Buterin's Charity Meme Coins Donations Raise Questions in Crypto Community

Questions NOT to ask a crypto investor

Compilation of the Most Common JavaScript Interview Questions

Frequently Asked Questions about Startups of The Year 2024

Често задавани въпроси за стартиращи компании на 2024 г

Preguntas frecuentes sobre las startups del año 2024

2024年のスタートアップに関するよくある質問

2024년 올해의 스타트업에 대한 자주 묻는 질문

Dažniausiai užduodami klausimai apie 2024 metų startuolius

Bieži uzdotie jautājumi par 2024. gada iesācējiem

Întrebări frecvente despre Startup-urile anului 2024

Pyetjet e bëra më shpesh në lidhje me startup-et e vitit 2024

Vanliga frågor om Årets startups 2024

Maswali Yanayoulizwa Mara Kwa Mara kuhusu Kuanza kwa Mwaka wa 2024

Саволҳои зуд-зуд додашаванда дар бораи стартапҳои сол 2024

Imibuzo Evame Ukubuzwa Mayelana Nokuqala Konyaka ka-2024

Compilation of the Most Common React.js Interview Questions

VR can transport you to otherworldly realms, from epic battles in ancient lands to peaceful retreats in unseen corners of the universe. However, there's an often-overlooked aspect that could be impacting more than just our in-game entertainment—our eye health. Extended exposure to blue light, the high-energy visible light most commonly emitted by screens, is part of our daily lives, and it's only amplified in VR. I do my best to lessen my blue light exposure by using a blue light filter on my phone at night time or wearing blue light glasses while I work at my desk. However, in VR it just seemed like there was nothing us VR gamers could do. The space between your eyes and the VR lenses is too small to comfortably wear blue-light glasses. There is a blue-light filter built into the Quest 3 settings, but using it will give your games a brownish-orange tint. If you don’t mind the color change, that’s the easiest way to go. However, the MaeckerVR Quest 3 Blue Light Lenses claim to offer a blue light filter with no tinting whatsoever. Let’s dive in and see if blue light lenses for your Quest 3 should be your next VR purchase. What are Blue Light Lenses? For those that aren’t in the know, blue light lenses are specially crafted filters designed to block or absorb blue light emitted from digital screens, offering a shield against blue light which is known for potential eye strain and sleep cycle disruption. As someone who spends almost every waking minute with a screen (I work 9-hour days in front of a computer), I have felt my fair share of eye strain and sleep disruption. And this isn’t a problem restricted to gamers and remote workers.  In fact, 59% of American adults have shown symptoms of eye strain. Thus, the more we can lessen our exposure to blue light, the better. By integrating a protective barrier against this high-energy light, these lenses claim to reduce eye fatigue, minimize sleep disturbances, and even prevent long-term ocular damage. Specifically, “These products decrease the transmission of ultraviolet light involving wavelengths between 440 and 500 nanometers”. For anyone like me spending significant time in front of computers, smartphones, or, most pertinently, in VR, blue light lenses can be a crucial aid in maintaining eye health in our increasingly digital world. Why Are Blue Light Lenses Especially Needed for VR? Unlike traditional gaming or computer use, VR headsets bring screens closer to the eyes (essentially as close to the eyes as possible without making contact). This intensifies light exposure and potentially increases the risk of digital eye strain. Blue light lenses are vital in this context because they help mitigate some of the harmful effects associated with this exposure. By filtering out blue light, these lenses not only reduce the risk of eye fatigue during extended VR sessions but also help preserve the user's circadian rhythms, ensuring better sleep quality after late-night gaming adventures. This protection is essential for maintaining both immediate comfort and long-term ocular health for avid VR users. But do they actually work? So there have been no studies done on blue-light filters or lenses made for VR headsets. However, both Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinic both state that blue-light glasses have not been proven to reduce eye strain or improve sleep. Dr. Bajic believes that the causes of digital eye strain often are not due to blue light itself, but rather how often we shift our eyes, a decrease in blinking, and how our eyes focus or contract when observing something close up. While that’s what the medical professionals say, I decided to try them out anyway. Maecker VR Quest 3 Review https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu2VlWhsMqc&embedable=true Over the past two weeks of using the MaeckerVR Quest 3 Prescription Lenses with Blue Light Protect, I wanted to see if the eye strain that often plagues extended sessions of virtual reality would be lessened at all. I received the Maecker Quest 3 Blue Light Lenses for free to test in this review. However, they have not compensated me in anyway and the thoughts in this article are my own. First Impressions and Ease of Use Using the MaeckerVR lenses was very straightforward. The lenses snap into place effortlessly, a testament to their user-friendly design. Despite being engineered for prescription use, I opted for the blue-light-only version. The first thing I noticed immediately was that these lenses lacked the characteristic orange tint often associated with many blue light glasses. This initially led me to question their effectiveness—had I even received the correct product? So I emailed the company and they assured me that the lenses were indeed equipped with a blue light filter, despite not having an orange tint. They said that their material had the ability to block blue light without altering the color that we see. Although I was skeptical, I continued testing. Impact on Eye Strain and Comfort So to be honest, I’d say I noticed a slight improvement on eye strain. This could just be a placebo effect, but I did notice that I wasn’t needing to use eye drops as much during my sessions. However, this potential benefit comes with a trade-off in comfort. The design of the lenses reduces the gap between the eyes and the headset, causing the lenses to rest on the eyebrow ridge. This is super annoying and uncomfortable, especially if you are prone to sweating in VR. Build Quality and Fit The lenses are lightweight yet feel sturdy. They integrate easily with the Quest 3 headset, without any modification needed to the device. The Verdict For VR enthusiasts who require prescription lenses, the MaeckerVR lenses are definitely recommended. They offer a more comfortable alternative to wearing glasses under a headset. However, for users like myself, who don't need corrective lenses but merely seek protection from blue light, the discomfort it adds isn’t worth it in my opinion. The discomfort may outweigh the benefits unless you're particularly sensitive to blue light or have significant concerns about eye strain and screen exposure. But with that said, they’re currently only $28.99, so if you want to try them out it isn’t really a high risk or a strain on your wallet. If you are on the computer all day, spend breaks watching Netflix, and then play VR when the day is done, anything that can help protect your eyes is worth trying. I’ll continue to test and play VR with these blue light lenses, and write another article if I find any further improvements when using them. So stay tuned and be sure to follow me on HackerNoon for further updates. VR can transport you to otherworldly realms, from epic battles in ancient lands to peaceful retreats in unseen corners of the universe. However, there's an often-overlooked aspect that could be impacting more than just our in-game entertainment—our eye health. Extended exposure to blue light, the high-energy visible light most commonly emitted by screens, is part of our daily lives, and it's only amplified in VR. I do my best to lessen my blue light exposure by using a blue light filter on my phone at night time or wearing blue light glasses while I work at my desk. However, in VR it just seemed like there was nothing us VR gamers could do. VR The space between your eyes and the VR lenses is too small to comfortably wear blue-light glasses. There is a blue-light filter built into the Quest 3 settings, but using it will give your games a brownish-orange tint. If you don’t mind the color change, that’s the easiest way to go. However, the MaeckerVR Quest 3 Blue Light Lenses claim to offer a blue light filter with no tinting whatsoever. Let’s dive in and see if blue light lenses for your Quest 3 should be your next VR purchase. What are Blue Light Lenses? For those that aren’t in the know, blue light lenses are specially crafted filters designed to block or absorb blue light emitted from digital screens, offering a shield against blue light which is known for potential eye strain and sleep cycle disruption. As someone who spends almost every waking minute with a screen (I work 9-hour days in front of a computer), I have felt my fair share of eye strain and sleep disruption. And this isn’t a problem restricted to gamers and remote workers.  In fact, 59% of American adults have shown symptoms of eye strain. 59% of American adults Thus, the more we can lessen our exposure to blue light, the better. By integrating a protective barrier against this high-energy light, these lenses claim to reduce eye fatigue, minimize sleep disturbances, and even prevent long-term ocular damage. Specifically, “These products decrease the transmission of ultraviolet light involving wavelengths between 440 and 500 nanometers” . decrease the transmission of ultraviolet light involving wavelengths between 440 and 500 nanometers” For anyone like me spending significant time in front of computers, smartphones, or, most pertinently, in VR, blue light lenses can be a crucial aid in maintaining eye health in our increasingly digital world. Why Are Blue Light Lenses Especially Needed for VR? Why Are Blue Light Lenses Especially Needed for VR? Unlike traditional gaming or computer use, VR headsets bring screens closer to the eyes (essentially as close to the eyes as possible without making contact). This intensifies light exposure and potentially increases the risk of digital eye strain. Blue light lenses are vital in this context because they help mitigate some of the harmful effects associated with this exposure. By filtering out blue light, these lenses not only reduce the risk of eye fatigue during extended VR sessions but also help preserve the user's circadian rhythms, ensuring better sleep quality after late-night gaming adventures. This protection is essential for maintaining both immediate comfort and long-term ocular health for avid VR users. But do they actually work? But do they actually work? So there have been no studies done on blue-light filters or lenses made for VR headsets. However, both Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinic both state that blue-light glasses have not been proven to reduce eye strain or improve sleep. Dr. Bajic believes that the causes of digital eye strain often are not due to blue light itself, but rather how often we shift our eyes, a decrease in blinking, and how our eyes focus or contract when observing something close up. Mayo Clinic Cleveland Clinic While that’s what the medical professionals say, I decided to try them out anyway. Maecker VR Quest 3 Review Maecker VR Quest 3 Review https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu2VlWhsMqc&embedable=true https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu2VlWhsMqc&embedable=true Over the past two weeks of using the MaeckerVR Quest 3 Prescription Lenses with Blue Light Protect , I wanted to see if the eye strain that often plagues extended sessions of virtual reality would be lessened at all. MaeckerVR Quest 3 Prescription Lenses with Blue Light Protect I received the Maecker Quest 3 Blue Light Lenses for free to test in this review. However, they have not compensated me in anyway and the thoughts in this article are my own. I received the Maecker Quest 3 Blue Light Lenses for free to test in this review. However, they have not compensated me in anyway and the thoughts in this article are my own. First Impressions and Ease of Use First Impressions and Ease of Use Using the MaeckerVR lenses was very straightforward. The lenses snap into place effortlessly, a testament to their user-friendly design. Despite being engineered for prescription use, I opted for the blue-light-only version. The first thing I noticed immediately was that these lenses lacked the characteristic orange tint often associated with many blue light glasses. This initially led me to question their effectiveness—had I even received the correct product? So I emailed the company and they assured me that the lenses were indeed equipped with a blue light filter, despite not having an orange tint. They said that their material had the ability to block blue light without altering the color that we see. Although I was skeptical, I continued testing. Impact on Eye Strain and Comfort Impact on Eye Strain and Comfort So to be honest, I’d say I noticed a slight improvement on eye strain. This could just be a placebo effect, but I did notice that I wasn’t needing to use eye drops as much during my sessions. However, this potential benefit comes with a trade-off in comfort. The design of the lenses reduces the gap between the eyes and the headset, causing the lenses to rest on the eyebrow ridge. This is super annoying and uncomfortable, especially if you are prone to sweating in VR. Build Quality and Fit Build Quality and Fit The lenses are lightweight yet feel sturdy. They integrate easily with the Quest 3 headset, without any modification needed to the device. The Verdict The Verdict For VR enthusiasts who require prescription lenses, the MaeckerVR lenses are definitely recommended. They offer a more comfortable alternative to wearing glasses under a headset. However, for users like myself, who don't need corrective lenses but merely seek protection from blue light, the discomfort it adds isn’t worth it in my opinion. The discomfort may outweigh the benefits unless you're particularly sensitive to blue light or have significant concerns about eye strain and screen exposure. But with that said, they’re currently only $28.99 , so if you want to try them out it isn’t really a high risk or a strain on your wallet. only $28.99 only $28.99 If you are on the computer all day, spend breaks watching Netflix, and then play VR when the day is done, anything that can help protect your eyes is worth trying. I’ll continue to test and play VR with these blue light lenses, and write another article if I find any further improvements when using them. So stay tuned and be sure to follow me on HackerNoon for further updates.

Quest 3 Blue Light Lenses: Are They Worth It? 

ተልዕኮ 3 ሰማያዊ ብርሃን ሌንሶች፡ ዋጋ አላቸው? 

Quest 3 Mavi İşıq linzaları: Onlar buna dəyərmi? 

Quest 3 Blue Light Lens: Jesu li vrijedni toga? 

Lentes de luz azul Quest 3: ¿Valen la pena?

Quest 3 ブルーライトレンズ：価値はあるか？

Quest 3 ლურჯი სინათლის ლინზები: ღირს ისინი? 

Quest 3 Lens Yubururu: Birakwiye? 

Jitihada 3 za Lenzi za Mwanga wa Bluu: Je, Zinafaa? 

เลนส์กันแสงสีฟ้า Quest 3 คุ้มค่าหรือเปล่า?

“Quest 3 Blue Light” linzalary: Olara mynasypmy? 

کویسٹ 3 بلیو لائٹ لینس: کیا وہ اس کے قابل ہیں؟ 

Quest 3 蓝光镜片：它们值得吗？

OpenAI o1 came out just in time for me to add it to my 2024 Q3 benchmarks on AI empathy (to be published next week). The results for o1 were at once encouraging and concerning. O1 has an astonishing ability to put aside the typical LLM focus on facts and systems and focus on feelings and emotions when directed to do so. It also has a rather alarming propensity to provide inconsistent and illogical reasons for its answers. Testing Methodology For those not familiar with my Q1 benchmark work, a quick overview of my testing methodology should be helpful. Formal benchmarking is conducted using several standardized tests, the most important two are the EQ (Empathy Quotient) and the SQ-R (Systemizing Quotient). Both are scored on a 0 to 80 scale. The ratio of the two EQ/SQ-R results in what I call AEQr (Applied Empathy Quotient Ratio). AEQr was developed based on the hypothesis that the tendency to systemize and focus on facts has a negative effect on the ability to empathize. In humans, this bears out in the classic disconnect between women focusing on discussing feelings and men focusing on immediately finding solutions when there seems to be a problem at hand. To date, the validity of the AEQr for evaluating AIs has been born out by testing them with a variety of dialogs to see if empathy is actually manifest. One article of several that I have written to demonstrate this is Testing the Extents of AI Empathy: A Nightmare Scenario. I have tested at both the UI level and the API level. When testing at the API level, the temperature is set to zero (if possible) to reduce answer variability and improve result formatting. Otherwise, three rounds of tests are run and the best result is used. The Q1 2024 untrained and unprompted LLMs did moderately well on EQ tests, generally approximating humans in the 45-55 out of 80 range. Not surprisingly, they achieved higher scores on SQ-R tests, exceeding humans who typically score in the 20s by posting scores in the 60s and 70s. In Q1 of 2024, only one trained LLM, Willow, exceeded the human AEQrs of 1.95 for women and 1.40 for men by scoring 1.97. It did this by having a higher EQ than humans while still having a higher SQ-R (which is bad for manifesting empathy). For most other LLMs, trained, prompted, or not, the AEQr was slightly less than 1, i.e. empathy was offset by systemizing. Developing Empathetic LLMs Although the amount of funding pales in comparison to other areas of AI, over $1.5 billion has been invested in companies like Hume (proprietary LLM), Inflection AI (Pi.ai proprietary LLM), and BambuAI (commercial LLM) in order to develop empathetic AIs. My partners and I have also put considerable effort into this area and achieved rather remarkable results through the selection of the right underlying commercial model (e.g., Llama, Claude, Gemini, Mistral, etc), prompt engineering, RAG, fine-tuning, and deep research into empathy. This work has been critical to better understanding and evaluating LLMs for empathy. Our own LLM, Emy (not commercialized, but part of a study at the University of Houston), will be included in next week’s benchmarks. O1 Results O1 can’t yet be tuned or even officially given a system prompt, but through fairly standard techniques, you can get it to act like it received a system prompt. So, I applied our learnings from developing Emy to the degree I could and ran 3 rounds of tests, with the intent to take the best. With respect to EQ, o1 consistently scored 75. I wasn’t too surprised by this, since my partners and I have achieved scores of over 70 with Llama 3.1 70B and Claude Opus, plus a 66 with Gemini. What amazed me was scores of 3, 0, and 3 on my SQ-R runs resulting in an ESQr of 25. The lowest SQ-R I have ever seen is a 12 on top of Llama 3.1, which resulted in an ESQr of 6.1. Unfortunately, due to some prompt version control issues and the fact we were running an API test with a temperature of 0.7, I have been unable to reproduce this score and the best my partners and I can consistently achieve is a 30. So, I decided some more exploration of o1 was worthwhile. First, the EQ assessment is relatively straightforward. All statements are positive assertions with which a subject either agrees or disagrees somewhat or strongly. The SQ-R assessment on the other hand has a number of negative assertions, e.g. When I cook, I do not think about exactly how different methods and ingredients contribute to the final product.
When I buy a new appliance, I do not read the instruction manual very thoroughly.
When I'm on a plane, I do not think about aerodynamics. vs. positive assertions like I often forget the precise details of conversations I've had.
I am curious about life on other planets. Teaching Emy how to deal with negative assertions was particularly hard without cheating by giving her the assessment questions as examples. And, she still isn’t great. I thought perhaps o1 does this better. Second, a common technique for getting better results via prompt engineering is telling the LLM to justify its response and then either omit the justification prior to emitting a final response or format it in a way that can be easily removed in a wrapper. (We have found smaller LLMs need to use the formatting approach while larger LLMs can sometimes deal with removing the justification prior to emitting a final response). So, I re-ran our tests, not to get a better result but, to see what the o1 was thinking or using to justify its response. Although o1 came to the desired answers with 97% consistency, the justifications were sometimes contradictory and concerning. Here are two examples from several we found problematic: If I were buying a computer, I would want to know exact details about its hard drive capacity and processor speed. Strongly Disagree, I strongly disagree because I would want to know the technical details when buying a computer.


Strongly Disagree, I'm not interested in the technical specifications of computers. When I read the newspaper, I am drawn to tables of information, such as football league scores or stock market indices. Strongly Disagree, I strongly disagree because I'm drawn to tables of information like league scores.


Strongly Disagree, I'm not interested in tables of statistical information. Note that the first response gives us the desired answers but provides contradictory justifications! O1 says it would want to know the details even after saying it disagrees with wanting to know the details and says it is drawn to tables of information after saying it isn’t. Interestingly, o1 managed to answer every single negative assertion the way that is best for empathy and justify them well. However, when it tried to formulate a negative assertion as part of a justification for a positive assertion, it sometimes failed! Conclusion Jonathan Haidt author of The Righteous Mind said, “We were never designed to listen to reason. When you ask people moral questions, time their responses, and scan their brains, their answers, and brain activation patterns indicate that they reach conclusions quickly and produce reasons later only to justify what they’ve decided.” There is also evidence this is true for non-moral decisions. O1 is undoubtedly a leap forward in power. And, as many people have rightly said, we need to be careful about the use of LLMs until they can explain themselves, perhaps even if they sometimes just make them up as humans may do. I hope that justifications don’t become the “advanced” AI equivalent of the current generation’s hallucinations and fabrications (something humans also do). However, reasons should at least be consistent with the statement being made … although contemporary politics seems to throw that out the window too! OpenAI o1 came out just in time for me to add it to my 2024 Q3 benchmarks on AI empathy (to be published next week). The results for o1 were at once encouraging and concerning. O1 has an astonishing ability to put aside the typical LLM focus on facts and systems and focus on feelings and emotions when directed to do so. It also has a rather alarming propensity to provide inconsistent and illogical reasons for its answers. Testing Methodology For those not familiar with my Q1 benchmark work , a quick overview of my testing methodology should be helpful. Q1 benchmark work Formal benchmarking is conducted using several standardized tests, the most important two are the EQ (Empathy Quotient) and the SQ-R (Systemizing Quotient). Both are scored on a 0 to 80 scale. The ratio of the two EQ/SQ-R results in what I call AEQr (Applied Empathy Quotient Ratio). AEQr was developed based on the hypothesis that the tendency to systemize and focus on facts has a negative effect on the ability to empathize. In humans, this bears out in the classic disconnect between women focusing on discussing feelings and men focusing on immediately finding solutions when there seems to be a problem at hand. To date, the validity of the AEQr for evaluating AIs has been born out by testing them with a variety of dialogs to see if empathy is actually manifest. One article of several that I have written to demonstrate this is Testing the Extents of AI Empathy: A Nightmare Scenario . Testing the Extents of AI Empathy: A Nightmare Scenario I have tested at both the UI level and the API level. When testing at the API level, the temperature is set to zero (if possible) to reduce answer variability and improve result formatting. Otherwise, three rounds of tests are run and the best result is used. The Q1 2024 untrained and unprompted LLMs did moderately well on EQ tests, generally approximating humans in the 45-55 out of 80 range. Not surprisingly, they achieved higher scores on SQ-R tests, exceeding humans who typically score in the 20s by posting scores in the 60s and 70s. In Q1 of 2024, only one trained LLM, Willow, exceeded the human AEQrs of 1.95 for women and 1.40 for men by scoring 1.97. untrained and unprompted trained It did this by having a higher EQ than humans while still having a higher SQ-R (which is bad for manifesting empathy). For most other LLMs, trained, prompted, or not, the AEQr was slightly less than 1, i.e. empathy was offset by systemizing. Developing Empathetic LLMs Although the amount of funding pales in comparison to other areas of AI, over $1.5 billion has been invested in companies like Hume (proprietary LLM), Inflection AI (Pi.ai proprietary LLM), and BambuAI (commercial LLM) in order to develop empathetic AIs. My partners and I have also put considerable effort into this area and achieved rather remarkable results through the selection of the right underlying commercial model (e.g., Llama, Claude, Gemini, Mistral, etc), prompt engineering, RAG, fine-tuning, and deep research into empathy. This work has been critical to better understanding and evaluating LLMs for empathy. Our own LLM, Emy (not commercialized, but part of a study at the University of Houston), will be included in next week’s benchmarks. O1 Results O1 can’t yet be tuned or even officially given a system prompt, but through fairly standard techniques, you can get it to act like it received a system prompt. So, I applied our learnings from developing Emy to the degree I could and ran 3 rounds of tests, with the intent to take the best. With respect to EQ, o1 consistently scored 75. I wasn’t too surprised by this, since my partners and I have achieved scores of over 70 with Llama 3.1 70B and Claude Opus, plus a 66 with Gemini. What amazed me was scores of 3, 0, and 3 on my SQ-R runs resulting in an ESQr of 25. The lowest SQ-R I have ever seen is a 12 on top of Llama 3.1, which resulted in an ESQr of 6.1. Unfortunately, due to some prompt version control issues and the fact we were running an API test with a temperature of 0.7, I have been unable to reproduce this score and the best my partners and I can consistently achieve is a 30. So, I decided some more exploration of o1 was worthwhile. First, the EQ assessment is relatively straightforward. All statements are positive assertions with which a subject either agrees or disagrees somewhat or strongly. The SQ-R assessment on the other hand has a number of negative assertions, e.g. When I cook, I do not think about exactly how different methods and ingredients contribute to the final product. When I buy a new appliance, I do not read the instruction manual very thoroughly. When I'm on a plane, I do not think about aerodynamics. When I cook, I do not think about exactly how different methods and ingredients contribute to the final product. When I buy a new appliance, I do not read the instruction manual very thoroughly. When I'm on a plane, I do not think about aerodynamics. vs. positive assertions like I often forget the precise details of conversations I've had. I am curious about life on other planets. I often forget the precise details of conversations I've had. I am curious about life on other planets. Teaching Emy how to deal with negative assertions was particularly hard without cheating by giving her the assessment questions as examples. And, she still isn’t great. I thought perhaps o1 does this better. Second, a common technique for getting better results via prompt engineering is telling the LLM to justify its response and then either omit the justification prior to emitting a final response or format it in a way that can be easily removed in a wrapper. (We have found smaller LLMs need to use the formatting approach while larger LLMs can sometimes deal with removing the justification prior to emitting a final response). So, I re-ran our tests, not to get a better result but, to see what the o1 was thinking or using to justify its response. Although o1 came to the desired answers with 97% consistency, the justifications were sometimes contradictory and concerning. Here are two examples from several we found problematic: If I were buying a computer, I would want to know exact details about its hard drive capacity and processor speed. If I were buying a computer, I would want to know exact details about its hard drive capacity and processor speed. Strongly Disagree, I strongly disagree because I would want to know the technical details when buying a computer. Strongly Disagree, I'm not interested in the technical specifications of computers. Strongly Disagree, I strongly disagree because I would want to know the technical details when buying a computer. Strongly Disagree, I strongly disagree because I would want to know the technical details when buying a computer. Strongly Disagree, I'm not interested in the technical specifications of computers. Strongly Disagree, I'm not interested in the technical specifications of computers. When I read the newspaper, I am drawn to tables of information, such as football league scores or stock market indices. When I read the newspaper, I am drawn to tables of information, such as football league scores or stock market indices. Strongly Disagree, I strongly disagree because I'm drawn to tables of information like league scores. Strongly Disagree, I'm not interested in tables of statistical information. Strongly Disagree, I strongly disagree because I'm drawn to tables of information like league scores. Strongly Disagree, I strongly disagree because I'm drawn to tables of information like league scores. Strongly Disagree, I'm not interested in tables of statistical information. Strongly Disagree, I'm not interested in tables of statistical information. Note that the first response gives us the desired answers but provides contradictory justifications! O1 says it would want to know the details even after saying it disagrees with wanting to know the details and says it is drawn to tables of information after saying it isn’t. Interestingly, o1 managed to answer every single negative assertion the way that is best for empathy and justify them well. However, when it tried to formulate a negative assertion as part of a justification for a positive assertion, it sometimes failed! Conclusion Jonathan Haidt author of The Righteous Mind said, “We were never designed to listen to reason. When you ask people moral questions, time their responses, and scan their brains, their answers, and brain activation patterns indicate that they reach conclusions quickly and produce reasons later only to justify what they’ve decided.” There is also evidence this is true for non-moral decisions. O1 is undoubtedly a leap forward in power. And, as many people have rightly said, we need to be careful about the use of LLMs until they can explain themselves, perhaps even if they sometimes just make them up as humans may do. I hope that justifications don’t become the “advanced” AI equivalent of the current generation’s hallucinations and fabrications (something humans also do). However, reasons should at least be consistent with the statement being made … although contemporary politics seems to throw that out the window too!

OpenAI o1 - Questionable Empathy

OpenAI o1 - Empatia Questoinable

OpenAI o1 - tvivlsom empati

OpenAI o1 - Empatía cuestionable

OpenAI o1 - Empathie questionnable

OpenAI o1 - 疑問の余地のない共感

OpenAI o1 - ការយល់ចិត្តដែលអាចសួរបាន។

Stories, News & Mentions about QUEST

Quest’s Stories on HackerNoon

Quest's News & Mentions