BeefDinnerPurge

Um, don't fill up at Brand X on the road? My millennial personal trainer said her dating prospects couldn't even change a tire let alone do an oil change, now I understand just how bad the situation was for her until she married a rocket engineer.

The Supercharger network is cool. But I can go 300ish miles in my class B RV before refueling as opposed to 120ish miles in my Mach E. It's 10 minutes to refuel my RV vs 45 minutes to 2 hours depending on the state of the charger (ElectrifyAmerica) or how long I have to wait. That was how I made the decision to wait for 400 mile range (likely a Silverado F-150 EV and yes I haul stuff, I build things, and my RV makes for a crap pickup truck but I get by) before returning to long range travel with an EV.

A friend circumnavigated the United States in a 300 mile Range Tesla so I don't doubt what's possible here.

I'll believe it when I see it. I lost a great deal of faith in EVs when the local dealer refused to service mine because I didn't buy it from them. On the bright side, Ford gave me a 5-year extended warranty to make up for their behavior, but WTF?

Lived that when I blew my Class B RV's transmission in Crescent City, CA on the 101 (Van life! Van life! #PortlandiaReference). I was going to be stuck there for a month waiting for parts until I galaxy brained my way out of it by getting my car towed to a dealer in Medford, OR and bought an EV there for below cost the same day, the first EV the dealer had ever sold hence the discount.

Or you exploit the many many free level 2 chargers around the region. But anywhere else, a PHEV rocks.

I have a 200 mile range EV, which is to say a practical range of 120-160. It's great for running around the bay area. It's not so great for the monthly travel I do going 500-2000 miles in a stretch because stopping every 120-160 miles for anywhere from 45 minutes to 2 hours is mind-numbing, and that doesn't even account for the mercurial state of the national charging network. It's also not so great in places less friendly to EVs. I'm upgrading to a 400 mile range EV down the road and I hope the charging network upgrades itself as well because it still sucks.

If they're close to the exit, it's clearly someone else's problem for those that aren't in our culture. If only they'd invested in their personal safety they wouldn't be burning to death and how else will they learn?

s/18-45 year olds//

s/(and I'd prefer men)//

Otherwise I agree. I have no problem with Stallone or Schwarzenegger in the exit rows. But realistically, they fly private jets or in first class.

Edit: Ageism and sexism are good, anti-ageism and feminism are bad! That effective accelerationist mindset has no room for the womenfolk or the senile!

In my 3 decades in tech, something happens around 10K employees and it's irreversible. Amazon was amazing in evading that for so long in exchange for a brutal cheapskate internal culture they slapped the label "FRUGALITY!" upon to make it seem legit. There's probably a doctoral thesis or two in analyzing how it was both broken and working at the same time.

AI models have an amazing ability to approximately memorize any training data. It's just that that memorization is useless unless it memorizes something real as opposed to random (randomized ImageNet labels as a simple example).

So as much as I want there to be a fair use case here, the artists have a real point. If someone can break the memorization without losing significant validation/test set performance, that might go a long way.

But even then, artists don't want their style copied either, and that's problematic to me in that if a human does it, that's OK, but if an AI does it, it's not? Yes I get the ease of asking an AI to do it vs a 10K+ hours artist, but, well, more or less the same to me on a geological time scale.

In the next year, I'm hoping to Patreon/Kickstart project that offers two major funding tiers. Hitting the lowest tier means it will use AI to create assets, and hitting the higher tier will use humans instead. My response to this brouhaha is to throw the controversy right back at the people creating it in the first place and ask if they're willing to walk their fancy talk on this subject with their wallets.

Downvoted because daring to say consumer power storage technology already exists conflicts with some sort of comforting folksy narrative that it doesn't? How is that in any way "Hacker" like? I thought we were supposed to be the bleeding edge types rapidly adopting the new toys. My bad? Downvote this too because "this isn't reddit" amIRight?

And what makes you think one L8 against an entire hivemind of L8s and L10s whose high-end compensation depends on negating everything you're doing can move the needle? 80+% of my meetings, so very many meetings, were endless discussions of who the next "unregretted attrition" would be so as to appease the need to fire. Those are your leaders, and that's how they spend their time. Or maybe you're one of them and the truth hurts?

I chose to "disagree and commit" to "The Law of Two Feet" and left. One L8 claimed he would be blacklist me and my direct reports (who also left) from ever returning. He got a harassment claim later and I asked in return for my input that HR investigate that claim. Nope, not blacklisted, he was just a lying PoS.

Nah, I hired specialists and caught no end of trouble for doing so. All of them that are still in tech make $1M+ annually these days because they stand out among the lovable but mostly ineffective fungibles that are the cannon fodder for rounds of layoffs there.

But advocating for my direct reports instead of happily figuring out which one to fire next is what made the experience so dreadful and career-limiting when the L8 and L10 herd's jobs depend on continually hiring and firing to look busy.

Pro-tip: if it's an abusive culture, leave ASAP.

So many trust fund babies know how to just sit back and enjoy life instead, that's true.

My electric bill in CA was ~$300/month.

$3600+/year.

Great investment, and no more power failures. But also, OP said this technology doesn't exist. You're pivoting to it exists but you can't afford it. Different question.

It is true. Amazon was always brutal, but two-pizza team six-pager culture was a great place to rule in hell as opposed to serving in Heaven as a generalist at Google. Two-pizza team six-pager culture died sometime during the last decade. At a guess, when they imported so many AI academics and they brought all the toxic worst practices of academia to bear on it.

The Applied Scientist title at Amazon is the single worst thing they ever created: 15% higher comp and stock if any L10 or up decides you are one, a 100% political position that set everyone against each other just like separating the bonus for the success of Google+ from the rest of Google did in 2011 (was there for that idiocy myself).

Former L8 there. Terrible culture, full of fungible engineers and leaders that suffocate everyone else with endless meetings and pointless process, with occasional patches of brilliance that keep it from collapsing into a quantum singularity of suck.

But TBF, any company squeezing the last few drops of blood from their stones is going to behave similarly. It's a great time to be paid a pile of money to hate your job.

I have ~40 kWH of Franklin battery backup behind my solar panels today.

https://www.ecodirect.com/FranklinWH-FHP-13-6-kWh-AC-Battery...

Tell me again how this technology hasn't happened yet?

Decentralized power generation is something we all need. Too bad so many politicians, especially Gavin Newsom FFS, are deep in the bockets of the utility companies who refuse to invest in it.

Yes to the first bit, but no to the second bit once you have batteries or other long-term storage, but that's not good for your narrative, now is it?

Hate hate hate on all the either/or politics here. We need both (though increasingly less nuclear with time), and we needed it yesterday.

What makes me sad, but also 100% unsurprised, is that this is exactly the opposite of the killer use case for LLMs. They should be used to summarize bloated ad-infested clickbait articles down to one paragraph or a series of bullet points. I don't want to read about the author's childhood, where the best place is to get the stuff the article is about, or some random anecdotes about that stuff and the author's unresolved childhood trauma that somehow have something to do with that stuff and something that happened with the author's relative(s). I just want to know what I searched for in the first place: how to do what I want to do with that stuff and nothing more.

Seems like an open and shut killer use case for sub-AGI LLMs to me, but also a nice thing, so that's why we can't have it.

It seems like git itself ought to be able to combine multiple commits into a single ubercommit for the sake of PRs, but allow pulling each of those sub-commits that constituted it in the first place afterwards for debugging and QA purposes. But I guess these 3d party tools achieve that as well.

Why be sorry, large sample sizes more or less guarantee the generation of outliers. But once someone attaches mythology to the event, you get another Sam Altman. Worldcoin alone should raise a lot of questions about his supposed one of a kind brilliance, but it didn't, so here we go again with another auteur too big to fail now.

Mid-show ads is more than enough to cancel Prime. Mid-video ads on youtube made me all but stop watching it on mobile. But I'll probably wade my way through S4 of The Boys and S2 of Invincible before doing so since they're both coming up in the near future. But this 100% explains the 2/4 premiere date for the last of Invincible episodes.

Same day and overnight delivery are something I never needed or wanted. 2-day delivery was nice, but now it's random. Amazon prices are no longer all but guaranteed to be competitive and buying directly from the manufacturer is often the same or lower price. Prime(sic) goeth before the fall I guess.

>Anyway, that wasn't my point at all, I'm just unsure how politically feasible it would be to accomplish this on the federal level.

Sure, every so often, someone publishes an article about how to balance the federal budget and it always comes down to neither being a republican nor a democrat. And that's why it won't happen. Compromise is dead.

>Would passing an extended ACA II with way fewer compromises and more effective regulation than the Obamacare version be really harder than instituting Medicare for All (so either a significant increase in federal income tax or a new tax altogether)?

My marginal rate in California is 53+%. That IMO is ludicrous given the horrendous condition of California and its budgetary planning. But...

I don't think the marginal rates are the real problem here. I think they're just peachy. The problem is we have an effectively ~20 page tax code with 4,980+ pages of bespoke deductions for individuals, corporations, and economic segments. Lose them all and start over with alt-min with far fewer exceptions (if any). I'm already taxed higher than most of the world* including most European Socialist Democracies without any of the perks and returns. It's not about the marginal rates. Which is to say we don't need new taxes, we need fewer loopholes to escape the existing tax rates. And we're not going to get that either. It's way too nuanced and esoteric a platform to gain traction with the sorts that think anyone making $100K in 2023+ is a plutocrat, so once again, I... give... up...

Also, California just loves multiple agencies competing for the same table scraps of tax money, but that's a different thread because all those redundant bureaucrats are getting paid on our dime.

*https://nomadcapitalist.com/finance/countries-with-the-highe...

I've literally never been about only healthcare for the cities or 100% medicare for all, I literally said it ought to be a baseline on which to build something better. It's much like how we can't even agree as a nation that coal sucks and replace it with renewables/nuclear/natural gas on the way to something better.

So here we are, paralyzed indefinitely, throwing more money at a broken system annually. But also, so many in tech build things from strong opinions about very complicated things, and they are inadequate, but at least they're not doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

I will say this though. I have yet to see private equity do anything besides make an existing problematic situation worse. And if that's what you mean by a difference between America and Hong Kong, yep, I agree.

So that's totally on brand for sama, no? He runs with the herd because he has a great nose for where the herd is heading. But it's the crazy outliers who dig into stuff like this and find the best options. I suspect he doesn't have time for that nor would he make the time. Wonder what choices Zuck made for his $100M apocalypse man cave.

So how do places like Hong Kong make this work? Because they do. My out of pocket expenses there uninsured are less than my copayments fully insured here.

https://journals.lww.com/jcma/Fulltext/2015/10000/Overview_o...

I suspect every reason you will cite is something we could both address as a nation and we will refuse to do so because freedom or some other idiocy. I truly give up. I threw money at family's medical crisis and prevailed. Most can't. More should be able to do so.

Even California is looking to places like Houston to mine ideas for improving their raging homeless problem. If you're not going to steal from the best, why bother doing anything?

The chief problem is here is asserting healthcare must be either entirely Medicare For All or the current inadequate privately funded system when the two can coexist. Just like legalizing drugs won't cure crime and unhappiness on its own, I doubt a baseline (note I said baseline) Medicare For All fixes healthcare on its own, but to assert neither are a step in the right direction seems absolutely absurd.

There are clear problems with the current system, and we paid quite a bit out of pocket to evade substandard care this past year with our insurance company threatening to not cover it at all at every step. We called their bluff by enrolling in clinical trials and they folded. Most can't afford to do so, and some never will, but I wish I lived in a country where more could.

And sure, a more transparent private system could work, in fact, utter transparency should be a requirement from the get-go given what is happening with the public/private mix in Canada. But we have 50 individual states in which to experiment yet good luck with that in the current media/political environment. Not giving either party a break here.