AviationAtom

This is part of what I love about Hacker News so much. It seems like almost any item posted on here quickly has someone that is involved with the project commenting on the post, offering their help and insights!

I'm looking forward to running ZBM through it's paces when I get some time.

I actually found out about it from a Reddit comment by Jim Salter a.k.a. Mercenary Syadmin, a huge ZFS advocate.

I'm not surprised to hear someone say such, only disappointed.

I will say, it seemed like right about the time the crypto markets collapsed again was right when AI application really started taking off and creating great demand. So I think the demand has remained roughly consistent. The big difference being folks with AI needs getting devices purpose build by nVidia for their needs, versus hobbyists buying up stock of consumer cards.

Read a big story about people setting up illicit mining farms in Venezuela (?), using the proceeds to buy goods and have them shipped to them, providing sustenance to those in their community. Unfortunately the government realized the dilapidated grid was hemmorhaging power in the area, tracked them down, and shut it all down.

Anyone that's bought in during the past few years isn't early.

Those that held pre-2017 are the ones that got in early.

The rest could probably make better returns speculating in the US markets.

I should add that, in my brief searching, to learn more about my own question, I stumbled on this. It seems much akin to the very cool rEFInd bootloader:

https://docs.zfsbootmenu.org/en/latest/

You're not concerned about all your system settings, installed applications, and any other data worthy of preservation on your root disk? Or am I misunderstanding how Root on ZFS works/boots?

Root on ZFS just feels too much like playing with fire to me.

Fixing an unbootable ext4 filesystem seems tricky enough already.

Am I just in the dark on how to easily repair boot issues, especially on more modern filesystems?

I feel like the OP probably had to put countless hours into working through all these issues to finally get back to a fully functioning environment.

Fair point. My thought process tends to be a bit more biased towards the Espanol than the Italiano.

There was an article posted here on Hacker News about a Google exec basically saying AI was a fad not worth chasing, and it had no viable means of monetizing with ads. I was shocked to read the article and flabbergasted that Google could have such a view.

To me it felt like maybe they were saying one thing, while doing another, to attempt to calm investor nerves as they try to play catch-up.

I felt most the entrenched folks were so consumed by trying to develop their AI to be ethical that they allowed OpenAI to run laps around them.

How the next decade unfolds in the AI arena will be most interesting. I wouldn't have thought Google could ever be knocked of their throne as dominant search engine in the space previously, but I now feel they have never been more vulnerable than they are now.

DOS?

Google is held hostage by their current revenue model (ads, ads, ads) and their belief that it can't carry over to AI-based products. I can't blame them for focusing so much on it, but they also forget how they got to ads making up so much of their revenue. They shook up the ad market back when, and AI can help do so again.

Microsoft is focused more on incubating OpenAI, getting a viable product to market now, and focusing on monetizing it down the road. Microsoft knows AI can complement an ad revenue model.

Google just opened up Bard to testers and I've found it to be complete garbage in comparison to what Bing Chat/GPT-4 can do. Bard was not afraid to just make up random things, that were verifiably false, and present them as fact. GPT seems to know enough to let you know when it's unsure.

I have. I found it to more or less be trash in comparison to GPT-4. Bard made up commands that didn't even exist, so I can't imagine how much more it would make up that isn't true.

Part of Docker's issue was the executed it absolutely horribly. They gave a short suspense, very little detail, and few options for migrating under such a deadline.

In my personal experience? No. I asked for 15%, knowing my co-workers made more than that, and inflation had been 9.1% YoY. I was told to be happy to get 3%.

What did I do? Found a different job and employer. Jobs are like insurance rates: you should shop around occasionally. For businesses it's a cost of doing business when trying to compete to lure new workers.

When people use your services in a matter assuming such, yes, I do believe so.

At the very least you should grandfather in old users and only change it for new users going forward.

Yep, the path to monetization is always adding new value-adds, not trying to charge for the current functionality after the fact.

I'm more thinking the new host key prevented SSL cert rotation from happening properly

It does make me feel slightly less worse about the environment I have to maintain

Could be a good chance. I'd venture to guess they failed to update the known_hosts file for one of their systems that handles certificate management. Strictly me taking a stab at the answer though.

This is so comical because it's so relevant.

Do you think people architect poorly designed systems more often than not as a means of job security or just a failure to put much forethought in whilst planning it?

I made DDG my default and was surprised by how well it works how. I do believe it sources many of it's results from Bing.

For what it fails to find well I just prepend !g to my query and have it bounce me over to Google.

Google results are more often then not trash now, so I don't think the bar is too high for competitors now.

I poorly worded that. I meant to say it will be able to answer most questions, but also refer you to the best sources for information that it can't provide.

If you saw how much of Google's revenue comes from ad spending then it makes perfect sense why it is the way it is now. But it goes to show what being hyperfocused on revenue does to the user experience.

Microsoft is really still in their infancy of building out their end vision for AI in search. Right now it's roughly a chat bot that summarizes and gives references, without really tying into their core search well. Eventually it will negate the need to click through to many reference, then it will be better able to curate a list of alternative sources for what you seek. I think that's the big problem with AI as it stands now, people think we've already reached the end of the road, when really we're only at the beginning of it. Watch and see what the next decade of it looks like. I agree with Bill Gates that it all will fundamentally changed the way we see and interact with the world (for the better).

Bing is on it's way in that direction. Microsoft needed something big to make Bing relevant again. This could potentially be it.

Will they eat all of Google's lunch? Probably not, but if they can begin to chip away at the insane share (93%+) of the marketplace that Google controls, then it can only be for the betterment of the Internet.

Reminds me somewhat of the Rambus saga

In the context of LLMs they aren't really sources, just additional reference material. I'd trust what Bing Chat tells me far before I'd trust Google's new Bard AI. It legit started making up non-existent commands for me to use.

I do believe I just saw an open letter from some Google staff to the CEO reiterating the need to uphold their "do no evil" model.

I can't imagine what it's like for the original employees to watch the company become what it has.

All the things that made Google so appealing, and gain market share, seem to have faded. It's a bit sad, to be honest. I remember being so excited to become a Gmail beta tester, back in the day.

I love that Bing Chat actually links to references. It felt like something was missing from ChatGPT without it.