Comment Re:Money pit? (Score 1) 14
(Okay, I take that back: there's one version in which I'd be okay with them lionizing Sam, but it'd have to involve actual lions)
(Okay, I take that back: there's one version in which I'd be okay with them lionizing Sam, but it'd have to involve actual lions)
I just hope they're not going to lionize Sam. That's the last thing we need. He pulled a classic sociopath-style manipulation to retain his position in the face of legitimate concerns about his abuse of power in the company.
Life is WAY better after the industrial revolution than it was before it.
People have this fantasy image of what life used to be like, thinking of picturesque farms, craftsmen tinkering in workshops, clean air, etc. The middle ages were filth, you worked backbreaking labour long hours of the day, commonly in highly risky environments, even the simplest necessities cost a large portion of your salary, you lived in a hovel, and you died of preventable diseases at an average age of ~35 (a number admittedly dragged down by the fact that 1/4th of children didn't even survive a single year).
If it takes people of similar social status as you weeks of labour to produce the fibre for a set of clothes, spin it into yarn, dye it, weave it, and sew it, then guess what? It requires that plus taxes and profit weeks of your labour to be able to afford that set of clothes (and you better believe the upper classes were squeezing every ounce of profit from the lower class they could back then). Decreasing the amount of human labour needed to produce things is an immensely good thing. Furthermore, where did that freed up labour go? Into science, into medicine, into the arts, etc etc. Further improving people's quality of life.
And if your response is "But greater production is more polluting!" - I'm sorry, do you have any understanding of how *miserably* polluted cities in the middle ages were? Where coal smoke poured out with no pollution controls, sewage ran straight into rivers that people collected water from and bathed in, where people extensively used things like arsenic and mercury and lead and asbestos, etc etc? The freed-up labour brought about by the industrial revolution allowed us to *learn* and to *fix problems*.
Meh, you do you. I'm rooting for the Torment Nexus.
Which of those things hit 800 million users in 17 months?
Which of those things hit such high annual recurring revenue rates so fast?
Which of those saw the cost of using the tech decline by 99% over two years?
Heck, most of them aren't even new technologies, just new products, often just the latest version of older, already-commonly-used products.
And re. that last one: it must be stressed that for the "cost of using the tech" to decline 99% over two years per million tokens, you're also talking about a similar order of reduction of power consumption per million tokens, since your two main costs are hardware and electricity.
You're looking at three months of very noisy data and drawing some pretty dramatic conclusions from said minimal data.
Winter demand is heavily dependent on weather. You're mainly seeing the impacts of weather on demand.
"The 2024–25 North American winter was considerably colder then the previous winter season, and much more wintry across the North American continent, signified by several rounds of bitterly cold temperatures occurring."
Billinos tastes great and at $3 per billino, it's both affordable and nutritious.
I don't think it will be updated anymore. It will probably go the way of Fat binaries or the Mac 68k emulator on PowerPC Macs.
You mean I won't be able to run my 68K mac programs any more?!
I have one of the last Intel mac models. It's served a good life.
An ARM based replacement will be no use since it doesn't have the specific CPU instructions I need and use. A windows laptop is no replacement because programming on windows is a shit show - MS C doesn't even have getopt. My windows builds for my command line tools have to use a replacement getopt library (ya_getopt) because visual studio doesn't doesn't have this library that is in the K&R C book FFS.
I'm on a Linux based Framework 16 now. I can code and browse and bash behaves like bash.
When a physicist at a university turns their diagnostic tools to mundane every day things, rather than say quantum particle collisions, the difficulty of doing the experiment is usually going to be much easier. However it can have good consequences for the rest of us.
For example an Italian guy decided to take a look at how filter paper under an espresso puck affects the espresso. Here . This showed that the puck improves extraction and reduces channeling. It's a simple thing to do and it has helped me with making good espresso in the morning.
So I'm happy that this sort of research gets done.
The reason why is pretty obvious, but I didn't get a grant to buy all the high speed cameras. I just have a kitchen at home.
It's pretty obvious that P doesn't equal NP, but can you prove it?
You could have just listened to any one who cooks alot and actually invests & maintains good knives vs blowing $$ on this dumb ass study. I never had tear issues cutting onions
I didn't have to. I have good knives. I sharpen them. I cut onions. Knowing something to be true is different to knowing why something is true.
This is well known information and any professional chef could have told you this.
But could they explain why and show evidence supporting their hypothesis?
I do not believe for a second that 20-30% of deployed code at MS has been written by LLMs.
I spoke with a friend working at Microsoft. He doesn't believe the 20-30% number either.
Have you reconsidered a computer career?