array_key_first

Right, it seems just like a marketing blip, which is bad, because marketing isn't meant to be informative, it's meant to be manipulative.

If we're using AI and we're still getting the gobbley gook nothing burger marketing word soup, then what are we doing here?

No, not everything IS rich and authentic. And no, it's not awaiting me!

I've noticed the less American and less wealthy people are, the more normal their kids interact with the world, i.e. "free range".

I don't know what it is about rich white people and freaky helicopter parenting. I also notice it with homeschooling and those crazy borderline eating disorder diets. There seems to be an association there between rich white people and pushing self-destructive behavior on kids.

You can get snapshots and live migrations working on-prem. The cloud isn't magic, it's just servers with hypervisors and software running on top of them. You can run that same software.

Also, with something like Hetzner you would not be going in and physically doing anything. You also just tick a box for a RAM upgrade, and then migrate over or do active/passive switch.

The cloud does have advantages, mostly in how "easy" it is to do some specific workflows, but per-compute it's at least 10x the cost. Some will argue it's less than that, but they forget to factor in just how slow virtual disks and CPU are. Cloud only makes sense for very small businesses, in which the operational cost of colocation or on-prem hosting is too expensive.

Yes, it's complex software that has to interact very closely with the hardware and it's written in C++.

Those aren't excuses, but they are explanations. The competition from Adobe crashes a lot, too. It's not necessarily a competence or money thing.

Also, the windows taskbar in windows 11 crashes a couple times a day for me. And Microsoft is one of the biggest tech companies in the world. And, I'm assuming, very talented engineers worked on that taskbar.

Right, but it is the SOTA and the sort of poster boy of everything kdenlive competes with.

I definitely think they should be coerced to host content if they insist on being the only avenue of getting content out on the platform.

If they don't want that burden, which is very understandable, then maybe they shouldn't be the sole God gatekeeper of content? That's a choice, after all, and one they willingly made.

We never had any progressive extremists in the US. Our last president was center, maybe slightly right of center. Our current president is a far-right fascist.

Wanting to be with someone of a similar or same religion is not racist.

Choosing to be with someone of a different religion and/or culture, and then expecting them to assimilate to your culture, IS racist. You don't have to do that.

I don't understand how we went from "corporations are stealing from us" to "we need to shame random people (who are just trying to improve their lives)"

Past performance is never a guarantee of future performance, that's a gambler's fallacy. Just because we found out more groundbreaking stuff before, doesn't mean we will continue to do so.

There are actually hard limits to things, too. For example, we basically can't make transistors any smaller. Like, physically it's not possible.

Prescribing antibiotics for contagious bacterial infections is their exact usage.

Some doctors argue against using antibiotics for strep, but it's definitely debatable.

The difference is nobody is saying that FAA regulations make plane crashes impossible.

Many people think what apple is doing makes malware impossible. That's not the case, the app store has plenty of malware and it's trivial to get malware on the app store.

The app store is trying to solve a subset of a subset of a subset of a subset of the problem, and then it doesn't even solve that. Yes, that means it sucks ass as a solution, unfortunately.

Or, to be more clear: the problem space is getting scammed. Apple is only even trying to solve an extraordinarily small subsection of that problem space.

You don't need an app to scam someone. And if you do have an app, it doesnt have to be outside the app store. And even if it's on the app store, it doesn't have to be malicious.

Even if apple did somehow, magically, eliminate malware there would still exist perfectly legitimate apps that can be used for scamming. And that would only address a tiny part of scamming anyway, because the vast majority of scams are not done using an app.

People can disagree with whatever, everyone is allowed to be stupid.

But most reasonable people agree there's no tangible use case to not wearing a seatbelt. There are infinite tangible use cases to using software outside the app store, that reasonable people can all acknowledge.

Usually when things are "in our individual hands" it ends very poorly.

This is because humans are actually extremely easy to exploit. Our biology is very stupid and also dumb, so even basic attacks can cause us to self-destruct.

And that's how we get obesity, smoking, war, I mean... you name it.

LLMs are basically perfect. While I'm sure some people, somewhere, can theoretically exist attacks from LLMs, on the whole I'm not sure that will be the case.

It depends on what the other consequences are, obviously.

I can fix the problem right now. We just throw all the children into the orphan grinder. Can't sexualize ground meat. Is that what you want? Wooooww, so you're telling me you want to grind up children?? That's really messed up dude.

It's super easy to twist any argument against this stuff to being "against children", which is extremely annoying and unproductive. That's why you, and others, get a lot of pushback - you're annoying and dishonest.

Nobody here, and I do mean nobody, wants children to be hurt. That includes me and you.

If you want to fix these issues, you have to answer three questions head-on:

1. What is the actionable, real solution?

2. Will it work?

3. How well will it work?

"Durrr sexually demeaning children bad" doesn't answer any of those. We all know sexually demeaning children is bad.

Now tell me if, I don't know, banning the Internet or some shit will work

No, people were definitely much, much worse in the past. Rape was more prevelent, so was racism and homophobia. It was basically okay to physically harm people so long as they were "weirdos", whatever that meant at the time.

No this is literally in the agile manifesto. It's not logic at all, it's the written word of what agile is.

What that means is that Agile and agile are not the same thing. Most companies practice Agile, very few are agile.

It's true though, these regulations exists because speculation and profit-chasing in agriculture is what lead to the dust bowl and worsened the great depression. We really, really don't want a repeat of that.

Are you just trying to be annoying and pedantic or do you secretly have a point you're trying to make? Because I'm not gonna try to guess your argument for you and then argue against it.

Heating has value because PEOPLE FUCKING PAY FOR IT.

Do you know what we call assigning monetary value to a service? Value. That's value.

There will always be some amount of people who are too cheap to pay.

However, that doesn't mean that if you plug all the holes that they will pay. No. They'll just not use your service.

In the long run it's better to keep these types of people around because they at least advertise your service. But getting any money out of them is a pipe dream.

People often frame piracy as "oh 5% pirated instead of paying!" Well... the "instead of" part is doing the heavy lifting there. The options arent pirate or pay. They're pirate, pay, or not use.

Yes, if we stopped making underwear the economy would suffer a lot. That's just plainly true, I don't know why you perceive reality as "deranged". I believe they make medication for that, you might look into it.

Human needs are a prerequisite for human productivity. Heating is actually more important than data centers. I think 99% of people would agree with me on that.

Well because if you don't do something then everyone loses their jobs, and then there's no more consumers, and then the economy implodes, and then everyone dies, including the people utilitizing AI.

It's kind of similar to how nobles fucked themselves in the middle ages. One would think having a lot of serfs is good, but no actually. Having a functioning economy would be better, and in the long run feudal economies stagnated.

And that's why I, today, am effectively much more rich than a feudal lord.

All of those are basically low wage garbage jobs. We have little to no respect for them as a society, too, to add insult to injury.

If it were up to me, I'd be flipping burgers right now. But I literally can't do that, it doesn't pay enough for that to be a job I can take. Id have to, like, find roommates.

Somewhat related, but I know construction is the one of the only industries that has gotten less productive in the past 100 years. You'd think more machinery and such would make it more productive, but no.

I think part of that is safety and labor cost, but I think another part is that construction is contracted almost always.

This is not an argument or a rebuttal, and I don't think you're really understanding what I'm saying.

I'm not saying altman is actually a murderer or that AI is even bad for society as a whole.

I'm saying that what he is saying is directly threatening to a lot of people, and it should be obvious that some of those people will lash out.

Something being good for society can still be bad for you. If you're someone who altman is bragging about making redundant, then you might be mad at altman. It's very simple reasoning.

I never said that I'm drawing the line anywhere - I'm merely saying that Altman bragging about it is a REAL and OBVIOUS threat to the people he's trying to replace.

Whether that's good societally is a different question. Is it good FOR THOSE PEOPLE from their perspective? Of course it's not, and that should be painfully obvious to everyone here.

So then, why are we playing stupid and acting surprised when Altman is in danger? Everyone should have saw this coming.

Nobody said he, or you, are murderers.

But if you're trying to get people fired, then obviously the people you're threatening to fire will be pissed. That should be obvious. You and altman playing stupid does not change that, it just makes you look stupid.

A DC does not have a few hundred full time people on site 24/7, it's going to be less than a dozen. It takes much, much less people to run a data center than people think.

Heating homes keeps humans alive who then go onto work, creating economic value.

A DC supplies, like, 12 jobs maybe. The 10,000 homes worth of power it uses supplies 20,000 jobs, maybe more if some older kids are working at the local Dairy Queen.

No, none of it is good, excel is basically a bad tool for almost any job. There almost always exist a better thing for everything people use excel for.

But excel has inertia, and it's the only programming non-programmers are able, or rather willing, to do. So we're basically stuck with it.

And yes, I consider crafting and maintaining excel workbooks programming, even if no VBA is involved.