_w1tm

How many technological innovations do you remember from the past 20 years and from which areas did they come from?

> In reality the culture and circumstances of parliament members is too far removed from the voters. I also cannot know the other representatives, so my voting decision will always be restricted to a shallow popularity contest. But as explained, this doesn't matter, because the elected representatives cannot implement any agenda.

That’s an odd thing to say when there is a real chance of the commission failing a confidence vote this week. We might end up with a new commission due to the conservatives colluding with the far right to abandon the climate agenda entirely.

This is a very concrete consequence of the voters electing right-wing parliamentarians.

> No it's not (like OP's article says). With a calculator you punch in 10 + 9 and get 2 immediately, and this was 50+ years ago.

Your calculator is broken.

> With an LLM you type in "what is 10 + 9" and get three paragraphs of text after a few seconds. (this is false, I just tried it and the response is "10 + 9 = 19" but I'm exaggerating for dramatic effect).

So you’re arguing against a strawman?

That’s not measurable either. Your opinion on someone is not data.

> Parents and guardians should definitely be aware of and concerned about what internet filters are in place at schools.

Neither of the words you used give parents any control over the situation. Legislation is the circumspect way parents are exerting control over websites that are unable to police themselves.

> The reason we haven't is because in reality we don't care much about that risk relative to the costs of addressing it (even with the cheapest possible solutions, which are not "colonize another planet").

You’re making a big jump to conclusions there. Globally we (EU and US) do care about this risk and in fact are spending hundreds of millions per year.

Or at least we were spending that amount. There’s some idiots cutting that budget in NASA AFAIK.

We have to figure out interplanetary travel first. Crawl before you walk.

Why do Java developers still have to tune stuff like that?

What makes the economics better in space?

Are there any unique use-cases waiting to be unleashed?

Desktops probably will stop existing before we’re gone.

Doesn’t this also mean that if you transform the work created by Midjourney, you now have a copyright on the transformed work?

I wonder what counts for transformed, is a filter enough or does it have to be more than that?

That’s silly, ice isn’t cold enough. Carbon ice might work better.

> Take Canonical's microK8s distribution. Do a snap install to get a Kubernetes node up and running, and run a command to register it in a cluster. Does this pass nowadays as rocket science?

That’s only after you compile your Ubuntu kernel and all the software. Don’t even get me started on bad sectors on the floppy discs they give out at conferences!

If the supply line is blown up at the beginning of the war then what was the point of switching gauges.

Someone needs to have data to validate a feature has value. Otherwise the company is just operating on the GIGO principle.

I’ll admit, companies like that do exist and somehow survive!

Then how can you know if building the feature made any sense?

> There may be drastic differences in syntax and semantics between the massive matrix of terraform version + provider version(s) and they've shown to be absolutely terrible at navigating that, even if you specify versions specifically.

To be fair, humans have trouble with that as well.

If reviewing and merging your PR puts me on the hook for fixing anything that breaks, I just won’t review your PR. If I had time to write it myself I wouldn’t need your PR in the first place.

> vs the opportunity to license the content to an aggregator

Isn’t this what Netflix used to be

> But in politics it does, which is that the right says yes and the left says no.

That’s not accurate, tax deductions for the poor is an obvious example. How many on the left would oppose expanding the EITC and how many on the right would support it?

> Because the federal government was meant to be extremely limited and mostly serve to mediate _actual_ interstate commerce and foreign affairs. The oft ignored 10th amendment left most everything else to states or the people.

What some people in the 18th century intended it to be matters little in the 21st. Today it’s a massive legacy system that is almost impossible to reform without a rewrite.

> Personally, I think we should simply fine the heck out of all websites until they all feature a "Reject all" button.

Personally I’m tired of cookie pop-ups on websites, a reject all button does nothing to solve the actual problem. If a users browser can somehow communicate the preference so we don’t need to click on pointless stuff then wouldn’t that be optimal?

When has capitalism been about maintaining key infrastructure? That’s what government is for!

> We are reliant on the US as only 2 companies can make the x86/64 chips.

The x86-64 architecture is on its way out globally thanks to Arm. RISC V is not needed for decoupling from the US.

> it's not actually possible without destroying the internet as we know it

Looking around at all the neo nazis, Russian disinformation and just the general populace turning more and more insane I’m getting pretty tired of the internet as we know it.

Maybe it does but the poster was still engaging in behavior similar to someone who has stolen the phone. That said, Apple should add some controls that prevent legitimate users from triggering security checks by accident.

> What workflow can have occasional catastrophic lapses of reasoning, non factuality, no memory and hallucinations etc?

LLMs might enable some completely new things to be automated that made no sense to automate before, even if it’s necessary to error correct with humans / computers.

> There is certainly some merit to that

Any source for that?

The profit margin has to come from somewhere.

> Also DI, which is arguably not necessary at all in Go given how elegantly interfaces work. > I spent quite a lot of time using wire for DI in go only to really study the code it was generating and realizing it truly is code I would normally just write myself.

DI is the idea that you should create your dependencies outside of the module / class / function that uses it and pass it in. This makes it easy to swap implementations.

DI does not require any framework and I would argue you can’t write modular code without it. Most likely you are doing DI even in your manually written code.

In a way you were a bad culture fit even if that’s not a culture anyone should want to fit.