civeng

Great write-up. Thank you! I’m contemplating a similar RAG architecture for my engineering firm, but we’re dealing with roughly 20x the data volume (estimating around 9TB of project files, specs, and PDFs). I've been reading about Google's new STATIC framework (sparse matrix constrained decoding) and am really curious about the shift toward generative retrieval for massive speedups well beyond this approach. For those who have scaled RAG into the multi-terabyte range: is it actually worth exploring generative retrieval approaches like STATIC to bypass standard dense vector search, or is a traditional sharded vector DB (Milvus, Pinecone, etc.) still the most practical path at this scale?

I would guess the ingestion pain is still the same.

This new world is astounding.

Asking this question leads me to suspect you have no true curiosity or willingness to learn a new perspective as it's literally a Google away. And then you will reply in another direction that justifies your narrow world view that is of course justified 100% by your experience. This is not effective discourse and I see you doing it all over.

It’s a well-documented economic concept. You can find plenty on it if you're actually curious about the perspective. And understanding it thoroughly is a strong prerequisite to seriously engaging with other people with intent to learn. It's work you need do yourself.

I appreciate the acknowledgement ofthe 'No True Scotsman' trap. It is easy to define a side by its ideals (e.g., 'The Left is for the poor'), but the reality is that both sides muck it up the moment they take control.

Neither side actually supports the poor because both are funded by and literally are the wealthy masters. The evidence is in the trends/facts that for almost 50 years the wealth gap has only widened, regardless of who is in charge. At some point, we have to accept that the 'which side is right' argument is false.

I understand your point that a typical US citizen has options where they work.

My point is when all options include wage slavery it's not an actual option. That's it, a false dichotomy.

And that is what the OP is about. It's exploring a fundamentally different system which I understand is scary.

This is part of the false dichotomy you are not understanding. It's not actually a valid choice if there are no options. And that is what this is actually about, understanding how we have no good options, and what to do about it. I recommend start digging in and we all question or own understanding and acceptance of the system. Is it actually working with even a simple majority in the best position we can be?

Currently employing 130 wage slaves and unduly profiting from their margins, and not satisfied with the overall system at all.

The battle between the modern 'Left' and 'Right' is pure theater. It’s a false choice designed to keep us arguing over who holds the leash while we remain wage slaves. It would be interesting if some of those individuals could have been more convincing 150 years ago

Which brand did you go to?

Agreed. You got a bad batch perhaps.

When CA first required high efficacy lighting in kitchens via Title 24 in 2010, it was a train wreck, there were no good options and it got a bad name. Slowly they were required throughout new construction in tightening requirements every three years. Then technology caught up and the quality, flexibility, color and lumen options have far exceeded incandescent bulbs. Now people are doing things never imagined (as discussed somewhat awkwardly in the article) with LEDs spurred in part by legislation that pushed the technology from behind. Perhaps one of the few times technology didn't create the product and market. Legislation has created the market, and technology responded. Doesn't usually work out that way...

Now however, the new control requirements are ridiculous and add far more cost than will ever be recouped. Most likely since these requirements were planned back when California used 90 percent more electricity for lighting, it seems rather useless especially in the face of our unaffordable housing. Hopefully I am wrong there but it seems we went a bit too far.

I am squarely in the business and there are successful and failed startups everywhere. It is dynamic, challenging but there is defintely no shortage of people succeeding. Perhaps the startups just dont have the buzz or respect?

Many successful ones are already mentioned, like Procore for example. There are many more focusing in the data collection and modeling space including BIM. For example, there are still tremendous opportunities solving little problems with data collection and selling to Trimble. Or automating tasks in software and selling to Autodesk. Or add CAD like tools to a PDF reader and sell that for a hundred million (BlueBeam). The list is pretty endless, no shortage there. I believe the shortage is perhaps the humble humans that understand construction thoroughly AND understand technology to a level that would allows a bridge between the two to be constructed.

My favorite failed unicorn startup in this space that I believe demonstrates the difficulty of construction is Katerra. I personally dealt with them as a vendor and immediately knew they would fail even before Softbank gave them a billion dollars. The hubris was off the charts. A bunch of tech people that tried to hire people in the business but just couldn't understand the scale of difficulties or challenges. I must admit they generated a fair amount of schadenfreude in me.

Our family is a huge fan of Cal Newport with respect to these matters, he is an inspiration and part of the solution!

100% they get it because we talk about it all the time, however it doesnt mean they agree but I would say they understand. There is pushback as age increases and social pressure DOES increase as well, this is why we think the transition is key. Our 15 y old son just drew up a contract in order to get a smart phone with things like a list of apps he would install, acknowledgement that we "own" his device, agreement that it will not be in his room. We will try to strike a balance between trust and micromanging, hopefully closer to the trust side of the spectrum! We expect him to fail a few times and thats ok, its all part of learning to use it responsibly by the time he turns 18.

This is a much larger issue than just a phone. Awareness of the great damage that can be caused by social media of all forms is just the first step.

Great question, and perhaps there is something better out there now since the popularity is rising. We researched thoroughly 3 years ago and at that time they had the best mix of features that fit our needs. Many dumb phones still have cameras and access to games which are both a non starter for our kids. Lightphones have no direct access to internet, but have calendaring which syncs to google, music, podcasts, and turn by turn directions. They are also hard to type on which we view as a feature that makes your time texting "count". We believe the e-ink display reduces the "pull" of the screen to our kids eyeballs.

There is also an element of the design and uniqueness of a ligthphone that starts conversations when people see it. Our son actually brags about his lightphone to peers and other adults, it is not an embarrasment which we believe is an intagible benefit.

OP here. Parent of 3, ages 12, 15 and 18 navigating this issue irl. Although I believe good parents aren't super rigid on any issue, I feel pretty strongly on this one. It's the parents responsibility and it's hard since it requires your good example. No phone, age 0 to 10-12, to the Lightphone (absolutely love this product) age 13 to 16-18, to a smart phone. I believe the progression is pushed off as long as possible and allows for a manageable transition to responsible use of a necessary evil. To restrictive and your kid goes off the rails at 18 or earlier. Too permissive...pretty obvious what happens.

Check out the thelightphone dot com, they have already done an incredible job doing that for you.

About 4 years ago we started noticing it really started improving. What version is she on?

Agree! The wet dry cycle at some point seems almost certain it would cause delamination. I'm surprised those failed bridges aren't more protected, it does seems risky, it seems they should be kept out of direct weather. Also agree glulams dont have a 100+ year track record, but it's getting there. They solve so many other issues such as efficient utilization of low grade and sustainable wood...so count me a cautious but excited proponent.

Good story about the Kauri Pine, that looks like a pretty cool tree!

Where do people refer a "2x4" as a "4x2"? Sincere question.

I have heard it, but only in the way of inferring that it was being used in an abnormal or "flat" orientation, such as for a floor truss assembly

Covered wooden bridges last hundreds of years and they are very beautiful. Maintenance is required (as with everything) but life cycle cost is really good especially for shorter spans.

I highly recommend the documentary Dark Waters and more so Rob Bilot's well written book, Exposure. It might make the greatest skeptics a little less confident.

Try Vectorworks. They had BIM years before Revit was a twinkle in AutoCAD's eye. Perhaps they fell behind for a few years but now but now more than viable and so much more stable code.

Bringing back a grand American institution could transform society. What’s stopping us?

The book "Difficult Conversations" coauthored by Sheila Heen and referenced here is an incredible read. If the OP is interesting, I highly recommend you read the book. It seems it was written for people with analytical minds. I have memorized the steps and am in the process of internalizing the self awareness required to be effective in this area. Hard but seems really worth it.

Post tension should not decrease the lifespan, if anything in some applications it could increase the lifespan since there can be smaller or less cracks, which is easier to maintain. Maintenance is the main requirement to get 100+ years in a normal environment.

Cool! And another civil engineer here, specifically structures. Lurked in HN for at least 5 years, I appreciate the perspectives in comments and articles. There seems to be a very high talent density here. I love to dabble writing code and hire coders for special projects, it's part of the secret sauce of a successful small business. The other part is culture which always comes up here. Keep it coming!

Agree. Seems a PE should be required to have a few years experience in the construction field before they are licensed. So much friction in the process would be avoided if the professionals writing and drawing the instructions for a structure had actually performed the work, or physically seen day to day challenges prior to having responsible charge. Structural engineers would be less arrogant as well. I see this happening on a daily basis.