> because end of the day people can use this tech to create wealth at unprecedented scale

_Where?_ so far the only technology to have come out widespread for this is to shove a chatbot interface into every UI that never needed it.

Nothing has been improved, no revelatory tech has come out (tools to let you chatbot faster don’t count).

Honestly, this comment sounds like someone dismissing the internet in 1992 when the web was all text-based and CompuServe was leading-edge. No "revelatory tech" just yet, but it was right around the corner.

In the backend, not directly customer facing. Coca cola is two years in running ai ads. Lovable is cash positive, and many of the builder there are too. A few creators are earning a living with suno songs. Not millions mind but they can live off their ai works.

If you dont see it happening around you, you're just not looking.

So, a company cutting costs, a tool to let you chatbot faster, and musical slop at scale.

This doesn't sound like "creating wealth at unprecedented scale"

It mostly was politics. Browser crashes and slowness were almost always traced down to microsoft own java plugin that strongarmed proper java plugin install out of the way every update and every now and then to be sure, with a semi compatible runtime and a classloarlder that insisted fronting the dow load of all resources.

It created so much uncertainty across the ecosystem even today people repeat the "applet crashes browser line, god riddance" line

But it was deliberate action by microsoft.

So yeah 100% politics because without a court document in modern society we cannot call this anything else.

No? Microsoft Java was discontinued in 2004, the crashes were infamous even way later in 2010. Flash was also notorious for crashing Firefox on YouTube. Not even mentioning the bad security of these plugins.

Yes I’m sure jobs went on stage calling out flash as the main source of Safari crashes because of Microsoft’s Java plugin.

When grandpa was young, if there was a wolf in the forest, they went and killed the wolf. They would not break the children legs to keep them home.

Killing the wolf saved both the children of busy parents that couldn't be bothered to break their legs, and the children that grew old enough to have their leg fixed but weren't yet adult.

Today instead of chasing predators away from children spaces, we just box the children so at one magic birthday they'd be out in the world untouched by evil. The world will be still evil however, and the not children for a day unprepared for it.

What if, here's a radical idea, we terminate corporation with toxic ads or that let predators use their system to target children.

If you could offer the proponents of these laws a deal where all the bills die in committee and in exchange Pornhub gets shut down, I suspect they'd take it. But you can't. The First Amendment doesn't permit such targeting, and almost nobody who opposes age gating would concede the premise that porn is inherently bad.

But again, the problem isn't this or that content-exchange site; the problem is people doing illegal activities within, or facilitated by, such sites, or people within the site that are sourcing willingly illegal material or distributing material that is illegal to some recipients. And lawmakers are targeting the middlemen and the recipient instead of going to the root cause, and the cynic in me thinks, "Of course they'd do that, why would they go after themselves?" But it's a bit of a reduction, and not all wolves are rich and powerful (though those who are uncaught or get away scot-free mostly are).

I was driving in a rural area, and almost hit deer several times. I finally made it to my destination, and island, with no deer, but a healthy wolf population.

The state would breed wolves on the island then release them on the mainland to keep the deer in check.

Sorry to ruin your metaphor, but we really need more wolves.

Alternatively, encourage hunting to control the population and harvest all that useful food.

Its gemini so at least its smartish and has some integration with the rest of the ecosystem so it can do some assistant work as long as its read mostly, but integration with the rest of the phone is almost non existent. It also struggle in noisy environments and in mixed language situations

Well, no. You run pretty fast into context limit (or attention limit for long context models) And the model understand pretty well what code does without documentation.

Theres also a question of processes. How to format code what style of catching to use and how to run the tests, which human keep on the bacl of their head after reading it once or twice but need a constant reminder for llm whose knowledge lifespan is session limited

I’m pretty sure Claude would not work well in my code base if I hadn’t meticulously added docstrings, type hints, and module level documentation. Even if you’re stubbing out code for later implementation, it helps to go ahead and document it so that a code assistant will get a hint of what to do next.

Really hate this "something was found" announcements

Which channel distributed the compromised apk? What is the signature of the payload injected? What is the payload, what does it do?

The same as everyone else’s options.

Adapt.

There’s no stopping this train.

climate change isn't an one/off effect but gradual

every bit of improvement is a higher chance to avoid some of the most catastrophic outcomes (where the unlikely but possible worst outcome being a mass extinction chain reaction which humanity will find very very hard to survive in a functioning manner/without losing their future)

so still worth fighting for any improvement even if we can't avoid a catastrophe anymore, as there is a huge margin between what we still can archive, and what we might end up with if we stop fighting and are quite unlucky

I agree, it's worth doing everything we can.

But it's also clear, it won't be enough. Emissions are not only still increasing, they likely won't stop increasing in my lifetime (in the next 50 years.)

We must adapt. The earth is going to get a lot warmer, and wetter in some parts, and drier in others, and sea levels will likely keep slowly rising for many centuries to come, if not millennia.

Even though we, collectively, are driving said train. As a believer in the great filter theory[1] it's a shame given how far we've apparently come, only to be brought low by our desires, our inability to believe we could screw ourselves this royally, and our collective lack of give-a-shit to fix it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter

I believe in climate change but in terms of a great filter candidate it doesn't seem significant - even in a worst case scenario with a lot of warming there will be large parts of the planet that are perfectly habitable.

On the other hand: nuclear war, genetic engineering, or just plain bad luck (carrington event, asteroid impact) seem much more likely to actually wipe out modern society

Aside from just plain bad luck, the things you list don't happen in isolation. Humans have fought bloody wars over land for as long as we've stood upright. Do you think we'll all neatly organize into the remaining habitable land?

I agree climate change could cause wars but I don't agree with the narrative that it will somehow cause 'worse' wars because... worse than what? We've managed to have terrible wars than wipe out whole peoples, and great power competition that almost destroyed civilisation in the 1960s without any climate change required. It's hard to see how things can really get much worse on that front

I think it's most likely a symptom, not an end result of our stupidity. It's the short-sightedness that lets us keep doing this, that is the same idiocy that will lead us to nuclear or chemical warfare which reduces us back to a pre-industrialized society. Only this time we won't have readily available hydrocarbons we can use to dig ourselves out of it again. We'll be stuck burning wood to make coal.

Interestingly in the UK the industrial revolution actually started with water power, not steam engines. It just so happens that the UK, especially England is actually fairly bad for hydropower potential (too flat).

We'll never know the counterfactual, but I think if coal didn't exist what you would have seen is an increased focus on hydropower instead. That would have meant industrialisation would have been slower and distributed completely differently geographically, but would still have happened in my opinion

Oh cool! Sometimes taking away the easy toys enables us to innovate in completely different directions. Maybe there's hope yet (saying this as a guy who lives at the base of some pretty tall mountains too).

You were downvoted for some reason I can't fathom, but I agree with you.

It's not an extinction level event (not for humans anyway, it may well be for many other species.) It's not a candidate for the great filter.

There will be migration, but over centuries, not a sudden exodus. There may be wars, but what's new.

The great filter isn't about extinction necessarily, but about not being able to transcend to a space-faring species. I don't think our ignorance of climate change will extinct us, but I do think the way we handle climate change is a symptom of the short-sightedness and willful ignorance that ensures we won't make it past Type I on the Kardashev scale.

I see your point, but to qualify for the great filter it has to prevent not only us, but most civilizations from continuing as technological civilizations.

I don't see it. Maybe at worst it's a temporary setback, not a permanent one.

it's both true and misleading in what conclusions people might take from it

e.g. if you want the true climate damage done by a country you would have to look at all the damage done by producing all the goods consumed there. This isn't very practical doable. But if you e.g. mass import Chinese goods you can't only blame China for the climate damage done in context of producing those goods (but neither can you take away all the fault from them, they still decide how to produce the goods in the end and we (west) motivate them to do so badly).

This also applies to Oil producing countries etc.

And some non amicable countries are so because they see no way to handle their economical situation if they tried to change it. But if countries where to work better together they might find a way forward. And sometimes innovation can fix that by itself. E.g. solar cells have gotten absurdly good to a point where sometimes they just out compete non-renewables on purely economical benefits. That is, if your government doesn't do regulations to actively prevent this (weather it's by hindering solar or by hugely subventionieren oil/coal/gas).

So the situation is both better and worse then the statistics above make it look. Better as you could move production away from non amicable countries and boycott their products and "convince" some of them by giving them a economical feasible means to improve. Worse because we know this won't happen and it means its not just "their fault" but quite often indirectly partially our fault, too.

Also lets be realistic thanks to corruption, short term thinking(e.g. next election) and sometimes plain stupidity many countries which try to get away from oil/coal/gas have done such horrible bad decisions that they not only completely fucked avoiding climate change but also have put their economy in a thought spot. When then is taken out of context and used by people like Trump as an example why fighting climate change is supposedly a scam.

Build economies around carbon removal, and investing in climate interventions like sunlight reflection to buy time.

"If only the world was perfect the world would be perfect"

Author fails to mention how to actually formally verify this asynchronous globally replicated product. He may have solved the delivery theorem and if that's so I encourage him sharing the results.

> No nullable fiels.

Author appears to have not formally verified his post's grammar.

Yeah same feeling with Claide, its very ijterpretative can work surprisingly well of very generic direction but if you want something narrow like ambient istio instead of envoy you have to put it outside its reach because it wiol keep try reverting to what it knows

Question: customer having issues also couldn't switch their dns to bypass the service, why is the control plane updated along the data plane here it seem a lot of use could save business continuity if they could change their dns entry temporarily