No judgements, I have no one in that race -- it's just something that triggers my 'weird language' detector.

A rare spotting of the Lebowski 'The royal "We"' in the wild.

that's not always true.

elon musk is mega successful. he lies and overpromises , 'hypes', habitually/incessantly. You burn one investor/purchaser/dupe-ee, you find the next.

downtime is always going to 'scale' poorly against loads that require a lot of hardware thrown at them, even with lots of good fail-over -- probably worse for the small vendors because they don't have the contracts supplying them with hardware first so availability is already at a premium for them.

so, I guess i'm saying yeah I hope frontier-level-models get out soon in the open arenas, but I suspect the same or similar level of exclusivity will exist as long as they take that much compute to operate.

normal hooch is dangerous, too.

only the biggest POS tools have bad ergonomics on the industrial side. The real quality tools, the ones meant to be used on the factory floor or in a production line, think of human ergonomics first .

I would probably be considering that as I took a file to my laptop in order to keep it from cutting into my skin as I used it.

I applaud the ingenuity, but I detest the concept of aesthetic-first engineering without a thought for the human user of the thing. Vote with your dollar.

In the case of parent : I admire your ability to cope and the chutzpah it took to take a file to company property.

on a side note : I think it's absolutely fascinating in every Apple thread watching users trade tips on how to avoid electric shock, electrolytic/chemical pitting, and skin cuts like it's just normal computing worries. You folks have some thick skin to keep at it. I would be rubberizing the whole damn thing after the first zap.

... why?

Google has a zillion employees and the story didn't even end altruistically on their side, what the fuck would the point of fictionalizing this encounter be? typing practice?

I get that it's kind of supposed to be an advanced jab at google "The world will end before you speak to a human", but cast the shade on the perpetrators rather than saying that the victimized side is lying.

My honeymoon ended and reality struck when I was LLMing together cuda kernels for poker solvers a few LLM-gens ago.

it got solved, but boy was it a slog -- but on the bright side it was an LLM-based endeavor that forced me to learn a whole lot about cuda kernels, that was a pretty cool side effect.

as for titles, who cares? I vote for grand poobah.

that's the single reason I am no longer a customer. I don't feel like shoveling money at non-communicating phantoms.

4 hours of credit wasn't by any means worth the time, what irked me was the casual disregard for lost customer value.

because most managers I know in my professional life go with the vendor that buys them dinner or slips them tickets for box seats.

why? do you mean because evil maid attacks exist? anyone that cared enough about that specific vector just put their bootloader on a removable media. FDE wasn't somehow enabled by secure boot.

>bootkits are a security nightmare and would otherwise be much more common in malware

why weren't they more common before?

serious question. Back in the 90s viruses were huge business, BIOS was about as unprotected as it would ever possibly be, and lots of chips came with extra unused memory. We still barely ever saw those kind of malware.

I haven't seen that done yet. I think it's one of those Dryland myths.

Engineering and machinery is still a place full of exploration if you have the chops. If you don't have them yet then there is plenty of topics within that domain to explore; you'll never run out of things to learn there.

My 0.02c : learn to disregard the crowds and focus on your own work. Just because people are doing something you used to do doesn't mean they have anywhere near the depth of understanding and 'freedom of movement' as you do as a 'resident expert'.

also : the fact that no one is doing something may be a signal; crowds form for a reason. Very few hobbyist bomb-squad folk and rabid-racoon-caregivers, get what I mean?

the GPT3 models didn't keep you from learning about ML. The industry didn't push you from keyboard and printers. You did these things.

If you're trying to lead an entirely one-off human life with total uniqueness from other people then all I could suggest is hallucinogens , but personally I think that the goal of just being unique for the sake of being unique is ludicrous.

Just find enjoyment, that's the goal for me at least.

yeah, the metaverse got abandoned. Also: Meta was the only one to try the concept for the past X-umpteen years even though everyone in the industry ga-gas over virtual reality worlds and workplaces at every opportunity. It's literally Meta and Linden Labs (which has been on life support for 10+ years.)

The alternative is : no one does it and nothing gets abandoned, which the industry has shown itself to be exceedingly good at w.r.t VR for the past 40+ years.

To be clear: I have no faith in meta as a company; my problem lies in kicking an entity because they attempted something different.. I don't think that's productive, and it produces stuff like the past AI winters because groups get afraid of touching experimental concepts ever again lest they incur the wrath of the shareholder.

it's not just an erosion of skills, it can also break the whole LLM toolchain flow.

Easy example: Put together some fairly complicated multi-facet program with an LLM. You'll eventually hit a bug that it needs to be coaxed into fixing. In the middle of this bug-fixing conversation go and ahead and fire an editor up and flip a true/false or change a value.

Half the time it'll go un-noticed. The other half of the time the LLM will do a git diff and see those values changed. It will then proceed to go on a tangent auditing code for specific methods or reasons that would have autonomously flipped those values.

This creates a behavior where you not only have to flip the value, the next prompt to the LLM has to be "I just flipped Y value.." in order to prevent the tangent that it (quite rightfully in most cases) goes off on when it sees a mysteriously changed value.

so you either lean in and tell the llm "flip this value", or you flip the value yourself and then explain. It takes more tokens to explain, in most cases, so you generally eat the time and let the LLM sort it.

so yeah, skill erosion, but it's also just a point of technical friction right now that'll improve.

Microsoft has zero goodwill from me with regards to software quality or pro-consumer business moves.

I will forever assume that microsoft product is 1) technically broken 2) trying to upsell and 3) probably required by some esoteric software suite, which is the only reason a sane human would put up with it.

i.e. if it could totally destroy itself with a full payload that'd be a very bad design choice, not that there wasn't plenty of bad choices wrt the kursk.

it's kind of like an electrical motor that exists before the strong understanding of lorentz/ohm's law. We don't really know how inefficient the thing is because we don't really know where the ceiling is aside from some loosey theoretical computational efficiency concepts that don't strongly apply to practical LLMs.

to be clear, I don't disagree that it's the limiting factor, just that 'limits' is nuanced here between effort/ability and raw power use.

want code that isn't shit? embrace a coding paradigm and stick to it without flip-flopping and sticking your toe into every pond, use a good vcs, and embrace modularity and decomposability.

the same rules when 'writing real code'.

9/10 times when I see an out-of-control vibe coded project it sorta-kinda started as OOP before sorta-kinda trying to be functional and so on. You can literally see the trends change mid-code. That would produce shit regardless of what mechanism used such methods, human/llm/alien/otherwise.