Later on of course some nodes started distributing over the Internet so setting up a node became much easier (and I think there was a way for the node to allow multiple users read/write without even setting up a node/point at all).

>We have covered this math before. The $725 billion that Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, and Meta are spending on AI infrastructure in 2026 has to come from somewhere. For many companies, the somewhere is headcount. Not because AI replaced the work. Because the budget line got moved to a different row on a spreadsheet.

So "headcount" (because that's what we call people) is being cut because of crazy spending on genAI infrastructure (part of which btw goes to Mr Hwang's company). Or, if you're not a hyperscaler, crazy spending on tools/tokens. But no, you should NOT tie reductions in "headcount" to genAI. That's "irresponsible" and "lazy".

Did I get that right?

Not that us plebs can do anything about it anyway... :(

On a side note, I'm curious as to how "600% increase in AI usage" is measured. Are their agentic workflows' bills skyrocketed 600% in the last 3 months? That would be in line with what other people using agents are seeing (costs are way higher than they expect/used to be). In that case, that would mean that LLM/agents are no longer necessarily cheaper than human labor, no?

Labor market data this week came out stronger than expected, even as large layoffs in IT continue to happen and IT job market continues to be very slow.

Canvas does provide a lot of value (all courses, teachers', students', and parents' contact information, all learning plans, schedules, room numbers, all grades, a lot of tests and assignments themselves, all upcoming assignments and deadlines, a lot of other coursework is in there, as are the final grades) but it shows that with external SaaS you might be one attack away from not only losing all that convenience but also in a world of hurt 'cause you lost all the data and now have to figure out how to proceed without the data and the system.

US high schools are in the middle of the finals, and seniors are getting ready for college (the transcripts to be finalized and sent out in a few weeks) so that was a scary timing.

The well has been already poisoned, to survive you have to get in on the action.

Don't want to play this game? Make connections, set up the network, and use it to get/stay employed.

Guess what's doing the ranking.

Recruiters scan resumes for the best match with LLMs, candidates use the same LLMs (there's only like 3 of them) to tweak their resume for better match. I don't know what research you need to see why that makes sense.

Youngest Gen X are 46, oldest are 65. Can we stop with this "retiring boomers" thing?

>Those readings were the strongest since February 2020 (63.3%), signaling that more people were re-entering the workforce and helping to ease labor shortages in the wake of the pandemic. Labor shortages. In the wake of the pandemic. That ended 4 years ago. Ssuuure.

>For workers 55 and older, demographic factors are key, with more individuals retiring, particularly since the pandemic. Got it. "Retiring": giving up on finding a job because nobody hires 50+ yo (either in the trades or white collar)

>These findings reinforce a clear post pandemic trend: young men remain the most likely to be on the sidelines of the labor force. This underscores the need for policymakers and businesses alike to develop strategies to draw more of them back into the labor market—efforts that could help ease workforce shortages by expanding the overall supply of labor.

"Nobody wants to work"

>As labor force participation among young people declines, fewer teenagers are gaining access to those formative early work experiences, and the essential skills that come with them, which have lasting implications for both individual career trajectories and the broader economy.

Have 2 teenage sons, at 14, 15, and 16 (last 2 summers) they were looking for a summer job (US, suburbs), retail, fast food... Anything, really. I made them apply to as many places around us as possible. Nothing.

>It also aligns with widespread anecdotal reports that finding employment today is more difficult than it was a year or two ago.

"anecdotal" Who wrote this stuff???

Oracle the company specializes in acquiring software, integrating it in their ecosystem, selling the installations, and living off the recurring licensing fees (NetSuite is one example).

It's such a small niche right now they do not even care if they're in their cloud. Enterprise users are the absolute majority of their user base revenue-wise.

However dropping the requirement might force them to change some things. Like in Azure-related stuff such as OneDrive where you have to design/build/test it behave differently if the user is not constantly logged into the Azure account. This means that they might decide to continue to force the Azure account and if they lose more of the end consumers so be it.

Unless they decide to separate Home and higher versions of Windows even more and drop the requirement for the home version users. But it might be more trouble than it's worth.

Enterprise is where the money is.

My first reaction is that it's a bit of oversimplification, LLMs have been on the scene for what like 4 years now? I doubt the effects will be visible when you look at the data.

But on the topic of inequality as a result of changes how value add is distributed between business owners and the labor - there's a very relevant book by Thomas Pickety called "Capital in the 21st century" (I believe he used the title of a similar work by another economist in 18th century on the same topic). He collected as much data as he could on income and wealth of individuals and groups for Western nations (some going back to like 17th century) and did some analysis.

In a nutshell, the share of profits going towards the business owners (simplifying, inherited capital) in the West had been increasing in the 18th and the 19th century, likely due to Industrial Revolution. Which in the US culminated in extreme inequality personified in Robber Barons (Carnegie, Rockefeller and Co). It was followed by economic and financial collapse, mass unemployment, and arguably, 2 world wars. It also resulted in creating various mechanisms designed to prevent these things in the future, such as anti-trust regulations.

After WWII (especially in the US) the distribution of value add between the ownership/capital and the labor changed so that the labor started getting larger and larger share, to the point that the economists declared that the capitalism solved the issue of inequality. That trend reversed around 1970s/1980s, which coincided with the invention of complex electronic computing and communication devices (and therefore inventions of the new business models). From that point on the share of profits going towards the business owners started increasing again, and that speed has been actually accelerating since the 2000s.

imho at this point US is basically where we were in the end of 19th/early 20th century. The individuals' names are different, the issues (extreme monopolization/concentration of capital) are the same. LLMs and other GenAI stuff are simply part of that trend.

Hopefully people at the power learned something from what happened 100+ years ago. But I kinda sorta doubt it.

I've been using various Thinkpads for 10+ years and have yet to use this feature. But hey, to each his own :)