pockmarked19

Title is patently false. The first part of the article boils down to "most people aren't pedants". The second part is mostly irrelevant because the Netflix pivot to "casual viewing" is a bid to enter a new market. Their viewership (and stock) would immediately tank if they switched exclusively to "casual viewing". TFA acknowledges this when elevating ABBA against something "no one has ever heard of". The insinuation is that popularity equates to quality whereas the opposite is true.

It just takes time.

Contrary to popular rhetoric, people are neither as dumb nor as smart as you might think.

> Fashionistas decry the homogeneity of modern dress. Most of us think jeans and a t-shirt are basically fine.

Again, most people are neither pedants nor purists.

I think that's the actual point TFA makes, but they chose an inflammatory title.

The staff title unlocks a new level of self-aggrandizement which is on display here and in certain published books.

As for professional qualities, I don’t think there is one. It takes a staff engineer at FAANG to do what a senior can do at a smaller company, because of all the other self—important people not listening to you. (Dealing with that is a skill though, so having that skill might be it.)

Or you could just Google it. [0]

That's right. People can just Google things.

[0] https://i.imgur.com/1Yx0m1U.png

Creativity and thought going into accounting ought to be illegal. Albeit I am sure there is plenty of demand for “creative accounting”.

Calling it a neural network was clearly a mistake on the magnitude of calling a wheel a leg.

It’s pretty easy to predict which way votes will go when peering into an echo chamber. Just watch.

Edit: and, it's flagged and gone. Voila.

No, you can get your new visa in any country US consular services are in, not just your home country.

The visa is not renewable, is what I meant.

> But to get a new physical stamp, I have to re-enter the country every 3 years. How does that make sense?

Why do you need a new physical stamp at all if you are not re-entering? I think your argument is backwards here. What I think you’re asking is “why can I stay in the country without taking this step, but I have to take this step to re-enter.”

Well, because when you leave the country you are subject to certain laws. Even a permanent resident cannot just leave and expect to come back whenever without consequence. Even a person eligible to apply for citizenship must meet a minimum threshold of presence.

Now, your question becomes “why are the laws the way they are” and/or “why doesn’t the law make sense”. I conjecture that these situations are particularly fringe for our legislators so they don’t get a ton of attention, and they make just enough sense to remain as is.

Seems like they caught up because I have posted this before including in chatGPT. All that means is you have to change it up slightly.

Unfortunately “change it up slightly” is not good enough for people to do anything with, and anything more specific just trains the LLM eventually so it stops proving the point.

I cannot load this link though.

As soon as you replace the subject of LLMs with nebulous “AI” you have ventured into a la la land where any claim can be reasonably made. That’s why we should try and stick to the topic at hand.

I see this sort of take from a lot of people and I always tell them to do the same exercise. A cure for baseless fears.

Pick an LLM. Any LLM.

Ask it what the goat river crossing puzzle is. With luck, it will tell you about the puzzle involving a boatman, a goat, some vegetable, and some predator. If it doesn’t, it’s disqualified.

Now ask it to do the same puzzle but with two goats and a cabbage (or whatever vegetable it has chosen).

It will start with the goat. Whereupon the other goat eats the cabbage left with it on the shore.

Hopefully this exercise teaches you something important about LLMs.

This is a very well done launch. We ought to be taking notes.

As for the app itself, it looks more like something niche Ev made in an attempt to enrich his own life than a business poised for growth. There is a place for that. I hope, anyway.

That’s exactly how it is, and one of my biggest gripes was that the most impactful projects naturally tend to be the ones that carry larger risks. In an environment where you expect people to manage their own success as described in their own words, they are never going to choose the projects with the biggest potential impact, only the safest project with the greatest perceived impact.

That goes beyond ignoring the long tail of issues: it chokes out innovation.

Spoiler: they aren’t.

Most Googlers use Chrome at work so it’s going to be better supported incidentally. The reason behaviors change when switching UA is because features vary across browsers and the UA ends up acting as a flag that turns features on or off. Not because someone is putting in a sleep() when they see Firefox. That would make for a very awkward code review.

When I was a Googler I exclusively used Firefox. Things were never so bad that I had to switch over to Chrome even with internal tools, though I suffered many hiccups due to this choice.

A note from Jobs on why just having an idea doesn't work:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kZ0zoDYOmM

Doesn't mean ideas aren't valuable, but the process is just as, if not more, important.

The full interview has more.

1.8% reported reading as unattractive. Person who made the graph didn't want to take any chances so they spelled the source 'psycology'.

It’s also magnetic, making MRIs (and floating frogs) possible.

Some of the best tests come from taking something mundane and twisting it just a little off the beaten path in a way that LLMs cannot handle. The usual example is the river crossing puzzle which has a standard format and solution but can be modified to make that solution incorrect. For code, an example would be parsing log lines to compile insights but switching it up so that the timestamp means something other than the time the log was collected, etc.

You can completely change the complexity of a bog standard leetcode question with the slightest of modifications, and I’m certain no extant LLM will catch such a nuance if your problem is a very common one.

A fun exercise is to ask chatGPT what the river crossing goat puzzle is and then say “do the same puzzle but with two goats and a cabbage please”. It can’t get it right even with multiple corrections. Might stop working at some point now that I posted this though!

There’s an argument to be made that by the time your business runs out of vetted candidates to hire you’re already staffed at some of the highest levels by corporate parasites who got there by gaming the system, and you can tolerate adding more elsewhere.

> The thought of permanently losing access to this account is terrifying.

Complete non-sequitur here, but that is one of the two inevitable things, according to Ben Franklin.

Yes, I’m talking about death.

So we should all make plans if there is actually worth anything preserving in posterity, plans that go beyond “just log in to my account” (which as OP shows is a huge PITA).