hug

The author would do well to check out Kagi -- the search results for all of the suggested queries are, to my eye, better than the results they found.

Given that Kagi's higher tier plans come with search-enabled LLM chat interfaces, and those searches use Kagi's results (which, again, appear to be superior) it seems to me that you get the best of both worlds: Better search, and better search results to feed into your search-enabled LLM queries.

I am not affiliated with Kagi or anything, it's just honestly that good a product.

Commiserating together means validating each other's negative feelings about something.

You may commiserate with a team member when you both get made redundant, as a healthy example.

When a team of several engineers are all thrown under a bus by a PM, they may commiserate with each other about the workload they find themselves with, as a slightly less healthy (but common) example.

But when you, as a manager, commiserate with the team about the PM throwing you under the bus, you are doing your team and the organisation a disservice, in that you're creating an unhealthy us/them dynamic when doing so, and the other things the article suggests.

An uncritical, and perhaps implicit, validation of negative feelings.

Sounds a lot like the Pomodoro Technique.

IPs are 4 octets, normally represented as a decimal between 0 and 255, or 00000000 and 1111111 in binary.

Remove the dots and concat the binary value for 1.1.1.1 and you get 00000001000000010000000100000001.

Convert that binary value to decimal and you get 16843009.

> Outside the United States, DoorDash and its European subsidiary Wolt have operations in a combined total of 32 other countries as of the end of 2024.

From wikipedia.

The entire problem of the article is summed up this paragraph:

> The ECDLP involves finding the integer k such that P=k⋅G, where P is a point on the curve, G is a known point (the generator point), and k is the ephemeral key. The difficulty of this problem is what makes ECC secure.

So uh. What is P? Why do I want to work it out? What’s G? Why do I know it, or not know it? Also k. I assume I know maybe one of these values, but maybe I know none.

Why does any of this make anything secure? I get, in general, that knowing numbers that someone else doesn’t know is good for me to be good at security with someone else, but is it?

… just not good.

Having not traveled to the UK, is a half pint not also a fairly standard size?

Pubs in Melbourne generally serve pints and "pots", aka half-pints.

> a shot is supposed to be 1.5 oz

There is no standard definition of a shot. Serves in the US will vary wildly, as will serves across Europe.

In Australia, a shot is 30ml (close enough to 1 oz to make no difference) which is exactly one standard drink or 10g of alcohol, assuming straight spirit.

It’s wildly and hugely unrealistic.

The rule of thumb that employees actually cost a business roughly twice their salary is based on two things:

1. Retention. Hiring costs are “huge”, and so if you have a higher or lower average retention, may make up a disproportionate cost compared to salary. Ramp up time and institutional knowledge loss is no joke either.

2. A spread of average wages. 500k is not average, and a huge number of the costs are relatively fixed. $1,000 a month worth of software licensing isn’t an uncommon number and is fully 1/3 of the salary of a $3k a month or $36k/year junior clerk. It’s peanuts when you look at it next to a $500k/year salary. It may be that the clerk is, all in, costing the company 3x their salary after indemnity insurance and so on. The dev will never reach 10%.

No, the fraud was done during due diligence.

You can read the timeline (from paragraph 63 onwards) here:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23570243-frank_suit/...

> She asked the Director of Engineering if he could help her take a known set of FAFSA application data and use it to artificially augment a much larger set of anonymous data that her systems had collected over time. The Director of Engineering questioned whether creating and using such a data set was legal, but Javice tried to assure the engineer by claiming that this was perfectly acceptable in an investment situation and she did not believe that anyone would end up in an “orange jumpsuit” over this project

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23570243-frank_suit/...

I see this kind of argument fairly frequently, and it just always seems like such a surface-level argument against prompting AI in this way.

This isn't a dig at you specifically, but the pithy answer to this kind of skepticism is, in a general sense: So what? I don't believe you have any of that either.

Obviously you & chatGPT aren't built the same, but in a practical-results kind of way in this scenario you are, because you're almost certainly unable to completely avoid your preconceived biases when asked any kind of complex question. You aren't aware of your subconscious biases, or how they're weighted against your overall thought process, and you can't tell me exactly what it is that happens when I ask you to try to ignore them. If we did some kind of implicit association test and found one of your subconscious biases, you may not even know how those biases came to be.

All of that to say: chatGPT can ignore its training as much as many people can ignore theirs: Not very well, but it'll certainly adjust the responses towards the thing you asked them to.

The 12" MacBook (not air, not pro) from 2017 was my dream machine... Except for the thermals limiting the performance. That issue could easily be solved with an M-series machine in a similar chassis, but alas.

The current 13" M-series Airs seem a little confusing to me -- the two largest dimensions are practically the same as the current MBP, so for my use-case (i.e.: not carrying a backpack) I basically have to carry a bag the exact same size as if I were going to carry the MBP, and the extra 300g (or 0.7 lb) is meaningless in terms of portability.

It feels like the Air is no longer really so Air-y, which is a shame.

In short, name resolution does not use the records in WHOIS.

Think of the WHOIS information as more of an administrative database, and the actual DNS servers (which are located at the location of the NS records) as the operational database.

It is useful to know, in your administrative database, how to get to the organisational database, but it does not hold all of the information -- just where it is located.

In operational contexts (actual DNS lookups), you only use the operational database (the nameservers).

In administrative contexts (transferring a domain between registrars), you use the information from the administrative database (WHOIS).

There are additional wrinkles, like GLUE records, but those are probably a bit beyond the scope of what you're asking.

Actually, very much yes. The device to be tracked needs to be exploited somehow in order to run the code to advertise its existence via BLE.

FTA's "Architecture of nRootTag":

> (1) The Trojan code runs on the computer to be tracked.

Parent clearly means upgrade at time-of-purchase.

FTA:

> Because the memory is non-upgradeable, we’re being deliberate in making memory pricing more reasonable than you might find with other brands.

If this were true, the best seafood in Australia would be in Alice Springs.

Conversely, I have one piece of life advice for you: Don't eat seafood in Alice Springs.

> Apple is incapable of having decent tethering even as they control the whole ecosystem

Are they, though? Tethering from my MacBook to my iPhone or iPad is a pretty seamless experience, to the point I don't even think about it. And sometimes I get home from a cafe and forget I'm even tethering until I notice my iPhone battery is lower than expected. And this isn't Apple, but I don't even notice I'm not on my home LAN because of tailscale.

It's definitely significantly easier than dealing with built in WWAN devices & ModemManager on my linux laptop. (Or Windows, when I used it on that same hardware.)

How do you mean do we "believe this nonsense"? I don't use twitter regularly, but I have two accounts for reasons. I just signed in, I typed out a (fake) signal URL, and... posting was blocked.

It doesn't appear to be nonsense, it appears to be entirely true that any tweet with "signal.me" in it is blocked.

Occam's razor says they're blocking Signal. Hanlon's razor says they're just idiots. Either way: An important tool for communication is being blocked by twitter, which is both dangerous and not "nonsense".

Given Elon Musk's current propensity for authoritarianism and censorship, I'm leaning towards Occam's explanation. If you have evidence otherwise, I would genuinely like to see it, but honestly Hanlon's explanation that it's incompetence is not much better.

I don't want to start an argument or anything, but I honestly do not understand your take.

If someone who loves and studies chocolate becomes, say, a bartender, and makes a cocktail specifically for the tastes of people who love chocolate in the same way they do, it is not unreasonable for them to advertise their cocktail as a "cocktail for chocolate lovers".

Will it be an appealing cocktail for all chocolate lovers? Conceivably not. Some may like more cocoa or some like a more buttery finish, some may be teetotalers and not want a cocktail at all -- but does that make it inaccurate advertising, or badly phrased? Not really, in my opinion.

This guy who loves the internet made a colour palette that he feels will be appreciated by those who love the same things about the internet as he does. Seems like reasonable and perfectly well formulated english to me.

Bluesky is neither decentralised nor federated.

I wouldn't let that stop you from signing up for bluesky -- in my experience it is definitely the best of the options for a twitter alternative -- but you should know exactly what it is you're getting into before you get into it.

And if you want to know exactly what you're getting into with bluesky, you should read this, which tells you more than you really want to know: https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/

This statement is one of the things that really boils my piss about almost all online discussions where valuations are mentioned: Fiduciary duty does not mean that you must simply maximise share price, and never has.

Fiduciary duty is specifically a moral imperative to do what is best for shareholders. Very often that is a large share valuation!

Sometimes, though, you work for a non-profit (who told their shareholders "we're not actually trying to make you any money, consider your buy in a donation, and your profit to be not being eaten alive by killer robots after AI gains sentience") your fiduciary duty to your shareholders is to continue to not allow an unhinged billionaire who doesn't appear to give two small fucks about any kind of safety to buy your company.

It was indeed an off the record chat, made public.

https://www.benzinga.com/government/22/10/29111070/obamas-ta...

The pin that pokes a hole in this theory is that commercial rents, at least in my part of the world in an expensive city, have risen faster than residential. Presumably this wouldn’t be the case if those third places were in such rapid decline.

Also, I’m pretty tightly involved in the local bar and hospitality scene, and most places are doing just fine — not quite pre-COVID levels at a number of places, but some are busier than ever.

As someone who works adjacent to rail operations, it's somewhat common to see used in a completely straight-faced and serious way.

Plant failing to be properly retarded is a somewhat regular cause of near-miss safety incidents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retarder_(railroad)

We're taking part in boiling a frog. The game starts off blank and peaceful with a single button inviting you to push it. It adds the DVD bounce, which is a nice little charming and nostalgic hit of dopamine. Then you get another DVD logo, which is a nice touch, double the points! Then you get a hydraulic press. Hydraulic press automation. Level ups. Audio. Oh no. Now it's the kind of unending audiovisual nightmare that browsing the modern web without adblock is, and it evolved in much the same way.

If you keep playing it -- either to find out what the whole point of this game is or because you are trapped in the game loop by your stimulation-seeking brain -- and you just keep building and building in overstimulating nonsense versions of real-world content until you are presented with the calmness of it doesn't have to be this way.

That first wave in the calm after the storm gave me literal physical relaxation: I felt the tenseness of my back & shoulders ease into a slump once the incessant babble of the attention-seeking components of the game went away. I felt better than I had a moment ago. It was nice. And it was, counter to your point, exactly a look in the mirror. Why do I put myself through the wringer on modern social media when I don't have to?

All of that to say I don't feel like the message is self-defeating at all. The dissonance is the point. Condition yourself as much as you like to the way things are by continuing to play the game, the peaceful beach is almost certainly nicer. Even just for 30 seconds.

Why not get out in nature? Touch grass, maybe, as the kids say these days.

Does that include the email addresses configured in your ~/.gitconfig?

If so, I apologise to fart@butts.com.

So her shibboleths were approximately every word in the English language?

Some of them!

The ones related to your butthole being out and lower than your spread cheeks, probably not.

Unless you know some wild programming tricks that I don't.