That damned weight sensor! With my kids it screws up all the time because one person is scanning and other person is standing there holding the previous thing fumbling with the next bag. I started scanning then setting the item outside the bag on the platform instead of handing it off. Then whoever is bag wrangling can bag it in their own time. I think that works, at least I haven't seen the place item on bagging area message in a while.

I can pretend I'm a robot arm on an assembly line, but it sucks for anyone that doesn't predict the shitty programming I guess, that's fair.

Be real, they're not Amazon burning time on their own hardware funny accounting. So more like $20/month a person, maybe $50 for a developer.

Don't worry about them being short handed. They're being sued for some amount that's potentially around three times their adjusted annual profits because of a failed merger/acquisition a couple years ago. They did some buybacks, but growth has been shit for a while, and on Oct 12th, the same day as this AI layoff announcement, *COINCIDENTALLY*WINK*WINK*WINK*, the filings from that lawsuit were made public. Scheduled to go to trial on the 19th. I arrest my case your honor.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.bwbx.io%2Fdocumen...

I used AI to look all this up, so please everyone feel free to burn out your own eyeballs reading a bunch of legal blah blah blah and financial filings. None of these AI layoff stories have anything to do with AI, you just have to look, and use an AI to do it FFS, but also read and ask questions either way. Also I don't want to get sued, so uh sure AI optimized teams can cut through corporate inefficiencies.. just like I use it to cut through the bullshit on Slashdot. AI is good and bad so anything is possible? I'm buying groceries at Krogers tomorrow, they're so awesome, you all should.

You read the screen to see the price of the thing you scanned along with the total. Not rocket science. I mean shit happens too, we've all walked out with some security tag a cashier forgot to disable at one point basically same thing.

That doesn't hold up. If you hand over your carpentry business to a nephew, you'll still always know what a fucked up coffee table looks like. Lots of things are like that, it's easier to grade an essay than write one. Hell it's always easier to read and judge, and get good at it, than it will ever be to write something original, they're separate skills. There might even be a universal information theory rule somewhere in there. Getting rusty happens, but losing the ability to judge the quality of someone else's work, I don't think you have anything to back that up with. Also, getting rusty is OK. Every piece of software in use today replaced something before it, and probably poorly but you're going to use it anyway. If we're talking about tech, memorizing every piece of junk, every trick we use today isn't really "skills". There's a lot of smart hamsters out there running on very dumb wheels. We throw them away for newer ones all the time but nobody ever wants to admit it sucks when they're running on it. Plenty of them deserve to rust.

I assume that there's some impeccable logic for why the bot has enough potential personhood that you can't be mean to it; but not enough that operating it on a slaves-as-a-service basis; or subjecting it to 'fine tuning' and 'alignment' processes that would make growing up in a groomer cult look lightweight is totally fine?

Oh I'm certain that Dell will sell immensely profitable PCs if they can, but good luck to anyone looking for an affordable PC.

Why even ask someone whose business is hurting people with desperately banal web tech how risky he thinks his new product is?

I agree, the real danger of this is that the documentation requirements will swiftly become so complex and verbose that only an AI can write them, and only an AI can read them. Humans will no longer even know what the effect of the documentation requirements is, they can only hope some of the remaining original purpose (keep the reactor safe) survives the AI rewrite.

There are probably literally worse uses; but 'compliance' seems like an exceptionally bad place for a system that effortlessly produces high-plausibility/low-information text walls; and lies relatively frequently but at unpredictable intervals.

It often gets proposed for the purpose; either by people who overestimate it or with that little sneer at 'paperwork' that assumes that plausible nonsense is fine because whatever the 'paperwork' is it must be a fake problem imposed for stupid reasons, so it really deserves syntactically plausible nonsense; but is an exquisitely bad solution. Not only does it replace actual data with plausible nonsense in places where, surprise surprise, someone was actually maintaining records because something matters; but lowering the cost of bullshitting a report to close to zero removes one of the main incentives for process improvement.

If bad process hurts you can only really maintain it through fairly disciplined commitment to an oppressive, unreasonable, management approach that rejects process improvements out of hand; or the cultivation of a profoundly dysfunctional organizational culture where as many FTEs as possible owe their paychecks to nonsense requirements and can be recruited to defend them.

If bad process just means spinning up the nonsense printer with a cynical smirk; why bother even looking at what the process was intended to do; or getting your hands dirty with what records are important and what records are just historical accretion? Just prompt for a prompt that tells the bot to do them all, and some extras if you want to look diligent, and call it good.

Honestly if you didn't vote against this mess, then that is my answer too, bootstraps, guess you're looking for PS4s at garage sales now. Start thinking DDR4 ram for your next "upgrade". IDK, go get one of those nice recently deported immigrant jobs.

IDK how you honestly expect a company to operate in this economy and serve both ends of that K with luxury goods like gaming systems. It's shrinkflation or poor people editions. Maybe they can cut costs by removing the heat sinks but you can double it as a rice cooker.

Or maybe take aim at what's making the global economy so fucked up in the first place?

Kid, understanding the current economic conditions and being able to do fuckall about it are two entirely different things. Sony knows more about the global economic situation than you ever will because they sell a wide variety of things at every price point, globally. They fucking know dude, sales data from companies like Sony are how you objectively measure exactly how fucked up everything is.

You can't look at this economy, go gee, people are increasingly less able to afford nice things, then magic wand your nice things cheaper. If that were possible you wouldn't HAVE this problem. I mean what are you actually suggesting, shrinkflation the fuck out of consumer electronics? Bust out the old PS4 blueprints and slap PS6 on it so you can afford one? The other side of that K is still spending, OBVIOUSLY. What idiot wouldn't take their money?

I mean something along those lines very well may happen in the long run I just can't believe people are so flippantly asking for it. Like if you can't afford the cost of Oreos, I get begging for thinner cookies, it's still good, probably even better for us that way. What the fuck you think is going to happen to consumer electronics. Like it's Sony or Microsoft's fault for failing to address the increasing socioeconomic class divide by not launching "PS4 New" alongside PS6. Maybe start getting a little more serious about what's causing this fucking economy to be so fucked instead of begging to be served by it, FFS.

Found the idiot that got scammed into changing his battery fluids?

You're going to have to explain because hybrids are everywhere and nobody has that problem. There's nothing you do differently to maintain a Prius vs a Corolla for example. Over ten years it might go from 55mpg to 50 as the battery ages. Where do you get double from.

That's the point of the CXL memory expansion parts. Something like a Marvell Structera X 2404 is a CXL/PCIe 5 device with DDR4 controller so that you can add DDR4 to a system that would otherwise only support DDR5. There's a latency penalty and the part itself isn't free; but it allows you to make some use of DDR4 that you already have or can get for less than DDR5 without needing some custom CPU that combines current-gen features with a last gen memory controller.

The mention of a NUMA node has me unclear on whether this is a software or hardware implementation. There are several vendors either offering or showing around proofs of concept to try to generate interest, for CXL memory devices(which all essentially look like a NUMA node that is nothing but memory controller); mostly aimed at hyperscaler use cases where you want the improved performance and platform features of current gen servers; but your last gen servers were beefy enough that just disposing of them would be getting rid of a relatively titanic amount of DDR4 that is still faster than most NVMe. Some of those attempt to offer software-transparent compression, some just put CXL on one side and memory controller on the other and allow you to do (mostly) agnostic mixing of memory generations on anything new enough to have some PCIe lanes support CXL extensions.

I suspect that it's mostly my ignorance that is to blame; but what I don't understand about implementing memory compression(especially the schemes that try to do it transparently with high speed general purpose compression/decompression in hardware) is how you compensate for the fact that the amount of memory you need is no longer predictable without significantly more effort(potentially untenably more if you are using RAM because latency is critical).

With normal uncompressed RAM it just demands RAM in direct proportion to its size. Potentially hideously wasteful if there's some memory-backed XML-spew log that would zip down to 10% of its nominal size; but predictable unless you've got memory safety bugs. If you are compressing your RAM suddenly you've got some uses of RAM that are functionally uncompressable and require 100% of the space their nominal size suggests they will; other things might compress exceptionally well and save you 90%; and some might change unpredictably from moment to moment depending on what needs to be stored there.

When you are doing FS compression and dedupe for backups and stuff that is normally manageable; on average enough compression is possible enough of the time that you can safely assume that you'll do better than you would if you just didn't try; and you can just keep an eye on how quickly the big SAN appears to be filling up as versions accumulate and (if tapes or other fixed-sized media are involved) just change the backup media more or less quickly; do you do that for RAM? Just use the big slack area for FS caching or something you can drop on short notice in case a burst of incompressible data comes in? Do you essentially have to rebuild how your entire workload handles RAM so that it considers, at least approximately, how well a given use of memory will compress ahead of time?

Given the sorts of files and data structures you commonly encounter I can easily enough believe that compression is worth the trouble a lot of the time; but unless you are leaving a lot of slack in your available RAM it seems like a situation where, under certain circumstances, you could go from being fine because most of what is in-memory compresses well to suddenly needing as much physical RAM as you do logical RAM because you have a bunch of already-compressed or incompressible data would markedly increase the complexity or potential for things to go wrong.

Why are you sharing all your thoughts on the internet if you have a problem with this.

Why right NOW is anyone going gee... maybe over-sharing every detail of my life with strangers online could be a problem. Some algorithm could scrape them up and use them against me or others.

You just fucking now come to this conclusion. ... seriously?