If you can haul a 60 pound lump up 20 stories, this article is not for you.
18,932 karma · joined February 8, 2014
Pennsylvania, for example, was one of the few places to take Walmart to task for employing illegal labor.
Texas and Arizona are notoriously anti-union and anti-resident/pro-corporation.
I'm not trying to test whether the best student knows the material; I'm trying to test whether all the students know the material.
As the person who regularly carried such groups when I was in high school and college, I was especially sensitive to this.
If you get Matt out of the way, you can ink a deal and resolve everything so that even if Matt pulls something else, there are contracts in place that can't be gotten rid of so easily.
Solving the last mile problem also helps solve the public transit problem.
The issue in the US is that the current population configuration does not have single population points connecting to single employment points like back in the days of the mills or the factories. As such, public transit becomes difficult.
For example, the train in Southern California is hampered by the fact that you need huge parking lots and cars at the transit stops. If you can take an autonomous vehicle at either end, that evaporates and a LOT more people can now make use of the train effectively.
Citation definitely needed.
The last couple of human rideshare drivers I have had were AWFUL. One was so awful that I gave them a one star with "Actively dangerous remove from road, please." I never give one star reviews.
Reading should not feel like wading through slop. Period. If it does, that is simply bad writing.
Too many people don't have the guts to simply say "No, I do not like that; there are better things I can read."
The issue is that people want quick sanctions until they wind up on the wrong end of the pointy spear--at which point they want accurate sanctions.
The problem is that quick and accurate are opposing forces when it comes to sanctions.
But, every now and then, the writing CLICKS and you get genuine emotional ART--generally as a monologue.
The first thing to accept is that different people like different things. If someone likes the Beatles, you wouldn't immediately jump to recommend Handel or Black Sabbath.
And, yet, this is EXACTLY what people do all the time with literature. Oh, you liked that Vonnegut story? Here, have some Dickens. ARGHGHGHGHGHG! NO! NO! NO! NO! Give the Vonnegut reader some O. Henry or Roald Dahl--not Dickens or Bronte. Good grief.
I got lucky. My father understood this. He always recommended things that he thought I would like--interspersed very rarely with things that were good for me that I might or might not like. But he NEVER gave me anything he thought I would dislike simply because it was supposedly "great literature".
And, now, Dear Readers, I leave you with wisdom for the ages imparted from Wallace Stevens via my father: "The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream."
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45234/the-emperor-of-...
The hardware is generally manageable quickly for me. Even th firmware isn't terrible.
And then you deploy it.
And the customer realizes it needs to do Q and that they asked it to do X and it doesn't need to do that and we need to take another $0.50 out of the BOM and ...
And then 4 years pass and you still don't have any real revenue.
There is a reason why so many places demand NRE of $1 million minimum and THEN they'll talk about designing your project.
The big gap isn't scaling. It's the scaling PATH. You need to have a viable and profitable path all along AS you scale from tens to thousands to millions. And those projects are VERY rare.
See: BeatBuddy for interesting post mortem and note that AI wouldn't really have helped them much at all.
I believe it's real, but there are no artifacts to corroborate. That's a poor article.
It is sad that the internet has devolved into this state.
The penalties for losing PII should be sufficiently high that even the most junior programmer should recognize the probably and immediately blanch whenever asked to write code about it.
A University must comply with Laws and Regulations X, Y, Z, P, D and Q and a host of other regulations the University never heard of and Blackboard went through the process to "comply" with those checkboxes. So, if you deploy Blackboard, you tick all the checkboxes automatically.
The fact that Blackboard was a garbage content management system and a terrible grade recording system was irrelevant--because the "better" systems wouldn't check the boxes.
(I say this as someone who, as a lecturer, had to manage the account logins, mailing list, and Subversion source control system for an entire class. I only ever put grades that needed to be "secure" into Blackboard. I did all that because I HATED Blackboard that badly, but it was a LOT of work. And I probably wouldn't have passed any significant security audit; although my accessibility ratings should have been excellent since everything was plain text and plain HTML)
However, what most people think of as Moore's Law--CPU speed doubles every 18 months--broke somewhere between 90nm and 22nm.
And even the actual Moore's Law--2x the transistors every 18 months--doesn't hold for all types of chips anymore. Memory only gained 2x density over 10 years.
Busting up Taylor Farms into 5 different companies would affect the food safety not one whit. In fact, it would probably improve it. If there were 6 different companies to choose from, for example, this incident would mean that one of them would go bankrupt as everybody switched to the other 5. And that would be a warning to the remaining companies not to screw up the same way.
However, since there is only a single supplier, Taylor Farms doesn't get any penalty at all. A couple of junior VPs get sacked and life rolls on for the CEO and his buddies.
From Nvidia's side? You get to keep the shell game of where your money and hardware are going spinning on the table for a little longer. If the party stops, Nvidia loses a zero right off their valuation instantly.
And, as a side benefit, you get to place your thumb on the scale of the open-weight hosting ecosystem. And maybe even fund a Chinese Anthropic or OpenAI at a discount.
OpenAI just popped out an inference ASIC. Google is on their 8th generation of TPU. Graviton is out from Amazon. The hosting companies want Nvidia out of their finances. Full stop. Nvidia has to do something, or it's going to get swept away.
In software particularly, what AI does do is give me back my time from the drudge work that I don't care about. Keeping my build system configured and my tests up to date and my documentation synchronized is a good use of AI because I mostly don't care about how crummy the result is as long as it "works".
Yes, the fundamental problem is the fact that everybody involved in RISC-V wants to sell IP instead of a chip.
The problem with the RISC-V chips in non-embedded contexts (ie desktop or server) has absolutely nothing to do with the instruction set architecture (not entirely true but a really good first approximation). The problem is that performance is strongly dependent upon your high speed interfaces--memory, graphics, PCI, etc. And those blocks need to be strongly integrated in with your CPU interfaces.
However, if you buy a whole bunch of IP blocks and then just wire them together, your performance is going to be sub-par. And this is what every single RISC-V chip that I know of currently is.
It's not beyond someone to sit down and do the required integration like Apple did for ARM. There's just insufficient money in it so nobody is going to expend the engineers.
The problem is that RISC-V is never going to win at the high end. RISC-V will never have as much money driving it forward as x86 and ARM. As such, the blocks and integration will always lag.
The portion of the market which RISC-V could dominate is the low-end (you know ... the same way ARM climbed up the ladder?) and nobody in charge of RISC-V cares because you have to actually ... SHIP FREAKIN' CHIPS ... and that's, you know, so icky.
And this is the disconnect. Low-end embedded has a bunch of needs and the RISC-V architecture completely whiffs on many of them and has active misfeatures on others while having very little that is actively good in that space.
And many of us are angry about this. It didn't have to be this way.
The problem is that everybody around RISC-V wants to sell IP instead of a chip. Most of the worst brain damage follows from that.
The rest of the brain damage follows from "We want to compete with ARM A-Series cores." No. Just ... no. Nobody willing to spend that much on a processor gives one iota of damn about ARM licensing fees.
So, the semiconductor market wants a cheap, consistent chip that operates in the deep embedded space while the RISC-V ecosystem considers the mere thought of that to be icky beyond reason. And China will push on this like Longsoon and pray that somebody figures out how to make it not suck (Prediction: they won't succeed.)
And, the worst part is that RISC-V has basically lost its window. The single possible advantage that RISC-V had was that as people converged to a shared tooling ecosystem it would create lockout. Unfortunately, that convergence never happened so, at best, we got some shared compilers. And, now, AIs can basically one shot all your other tools around it and probably the compiler not far behind. And there goes your ecosystem lockout.
It's not just according to you.
Without open weights, what happens if you get blacklisted from Anthropic and OpenAI? If AI becomes a standard tool for programming like a compiler, you've effectively been Blackballed from the field of programming. Full Stop. This is "Right to Read" coming home: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
In addition, without open source competitors to your core tools, we KNOW what happens. Cadence and Synopsys and a megabuck per engineer per year ... that's what happens.
Yeah, the whole "I'm going to free an object in an arena." is very confusing to me.
You free an arena, or you don't. There is no granularity below that if you're using an arena.
I get it. It's an incredibly tempting abstraction break to just let normal resize/free work on the last allocation. However, it is an abstraction break and has nasty edge cases like this.
Horse doping is old. Schwarzenegger was doped up and winning in 1968+ so the science was there.
The idea that someone wouldn't dope up a horse for a marquis event like this is absurd. And once Secretariat became that famous, nobody across the industry was going to kill the golden goose by pointing out doping.
However, the window was narrow. New tests came online in the mid 1980s to detect horse doping.
The fact that nobody has been able to get even close to Secretariat's times given significant advances in nutrition and training is extremely suspicious.
I'm fine paying $200 per month. Companies seem to be fine at $2000 per month but I would balk at that. Companies are already balking at $20,000 per month.
So, we KNOW what the numbers are. If corporations are only willing to pay $2000 per month per developer for all the developers in the US, the amount of VC investment already exceeds what they can get back from 10 years of revenue.
Come on. There are shades here.
I guarantee that even your best programmers are using AI to run down certain classes of bugs--especially in corporate environments. Asking the AI to help you unwind some screwy source control merge or to remember some obscure set of flags is a damn good usage of AI, for example. Nobody thinks twice of using a search engine for this so AI is a no-brainer.
The issue is when people use the AI for all the code. I have to tell AI all the time "That code is there because X and you mangling it is a problem." or "You violated Y. Explain to me why you did that anyway and don't do it again."
The problem is that to do that you have to know the code and you don't know the code if you didn't write it.
In particular, I use 135F for 90 minutes (75 minimum recommended) to pasteurize eggs that I am going to be putting into something that asks for "raw" eggs (egg nog, mayonnaise, etc.) that I will serve to other people (if it's just for myself, I'll probably just be lazy and use the raw egg). So far, nobody has noticed any difference from "raw".
For maximum techyness, Combustion, Inc. correctly identified that sous vide is normally an overdamped system. If you follow their instructions you can increase the water temp some and then bring it back down in order to move the system closer to critically damped and speed up your sous vide.