joshribakoff

Good. Amazon lies to customers too. They will tell me things like go down to UPS and buy a box and we will refund the cost, then when you chat back they waste hours and request screenshots and then still refuse to issue the refund. They started treating customers like dirt and refusing to honor their own policies within the last year or so. Additionally they will do things like end the chat abruptly or transfer you around 15x repeating the same questions over and over. In another case they promised a full refund and only after I returned the item told me I wouldn’t get a refund due to “restocking fees”. Its too egregious to not be intentional. I will specifically spend more money just to avoid them because the wasted time and frustration isn’t worth any marginal savings.

The only way this will happen (anytime soon) is if they put the safety drivers back in but they will never do that willingly because they have worked for a decade and invested billions to get to this point and it would be difficult to capitulate. There is simply no way to remotely assist reliably in the same way as being physically present (no network has 0 latency and 100% reliability). The AI likely cannot drive “perfectly” no matter how good it gets and neither can humans, but for the foreseeable future the AI will continue making entirely different type of mistakes than humans do.

A human likely wouldn’t sit there failing to move over with an ambulance honking and blaring its sirens so this hypothetical is ridiculous, and the media isn’t slandering them by reporting on the incident. No one knows “what would have happened” for certain, and the headline only implies the mere possibility of causation (for anyone literate who reads it)

What part of “pull over to the right” is hard to understand or ambiguous for you? Thats my understanding of the law.

As a driver in SF ive been stuck behind Waymo cars even as construction workers waved them to go with exaggerated hand motions. Was stuck for several minutes before hazard lights turned on and then shortly later it moved, i assume a remote human assistant got involved. Same with zoox, they have delayed me commuting to work. I want them banned/put back safety drivers

The city has no regulatory authority, and unfortunately the DMV (a state entity) largely allows them to self regulate.

I believe you’re citing a stat corresponding to the number of traffic fatalities. That doesn’t mean in all of those cases one person killed another as you implied. For example if someone dies after drunk driving and crashes themselves into a tree that doesn’t seem right to say “the driver killed someone”

You’re incorrectly assuming that lack of cell service causes the cars to stop. The quote you copied says it impacted their ability to remotely get the cars unstuck. What alternative would you propose (besides adding back in safety drivers)? Should the car keep going when it is not confident to do so?

The parent comment specifically calls out they’re not, ergo “some people”.

This is by design, the race conditions are caused by your implementation not complying with the constraints it was designed for you to stay within.

Use a local variable (not react state) if you need to store a value and read it back synchronously. Use a useEffect hook if you need side effects to run when react state changes, and finally useMemo if you need derived react state

It sounds like you are saying there is no reason other than pressure, presumably from a board. Perhaps the board has a reason.

The decision maker likely wants the app installed because it increases the friction to users to “replace” the app with a competing one. Amazon used to offer $5 credits to install their app years ago, and I initially struggled to understand the reasoning; however these days its so convenient to buy via the amazon app compared to signing up for an account on different websites (i am more likely to use Amazon which is already installed than to go directly to some manufacturer and buy directly)

One drawback of this is the person behind may incorrectly assume you’re brake checking them; i have had a number of tailgating drivers retaliate by accelerating in front of me and slamming on their brakes (which is especially stressful with a kid in the car). Stuff like this makes me deeply regret choosing Tesla.

The author seems to propose it is impossible for large teams to be productive. They even go so far as to claim most potential team mates have malice intent to “sabotage the project”.

Amazon is an example of an organization that does this well (i used to work there). Small teams are responsible for their own project(s). Project(s) can be composed to form higher level project(s). It’s certainly not impossible, and id rather put in effort to manage team(s) than to place an increasingly insurmountable amount of pressure on myself.

Perhaps the reason the author’s project has “few users” is that there are competing alternatives that have authors who understand how to leverage team work to deliver more value to users, and users go where they perceive value.

Also, if you worked for an organization that actually hired (and retained) people with malice intent, i dont think team size was the real issue. In that sense i do agree with the author that you should screen anyone and ensure your goals align before agreeing to invest time in trying to work together. If someone is offering to add a feature you dont think fits in the project, i have a hard time characterizing that as “malice intent”, though!

In case you’re living under a rock, it already happened. Are they perfect and driving everywhere in every city? No… but here in SF it is not unusual to see cars with no one in them, they’re driving all over the city, at all times, in parking lots, through school zones, etc

Also you’re trying to discredit a well credentialed individual (who worked in automotive safety regulation) based upon age/gender and other irrelevant factors. I feel the need to call that out as toxic.

It is also true that humans in general cannot drive [without crashing].

Doesn’t the comment you just replied to link to one? (Tsx)

That is precisely the type of editorial affordance I would expect the AI to strip. This is just another way for media organizations to distort the news. I look forward to those enhancements

Counter argument is that i dont care about any of those arguments for the use case where i shut my laptop lid and now cant boot my dev server during local development

This doesn’t seem consistent with my experience. When you say “4-6 weeks to get a cluster up” i wonder if you actually mean to learn kubernetes and play around with deploying things, as that would make sense. I was able to install k3s in around 15 minutes and deploy my first service, myself.

For some people learning to change the oil on their car could be “a full time job”, but it doesn’t change the fact oil changes are a commodity i can go pay $50 for at a shop.

Similarly, any cloud provider worth it’s salt provides a managed k8 cluster as a commodity these days.

You’re not making an apples to apples comparison. You can run k8 on a single server or run 1,000 bare metal servers. Number of servers and how you deploy to them are tangential things and not mutually exclusive.

You seem to also be implying that by running a single bare metal server you have eliminated any chance of downtime which isn’t true

For example if your process crashes on bare metal, you go down, unless you have some kind of supervisor that watched and restarts the process, if youre not using kubernetes as a supervisor then you need to set one up using some other tool. At the end of the day you can’t eliminate all tooling/downtime.

That library doesn’t even appear to have a stable release yet, and was at v0.0.x as of a year or so ago… you also may be using chatGPT 3.5 which may predate this library. As a dev with 15 years of experience I haven’t even switched over from jest (but plan to)… all this to say, maybe we can give the bot some slack here. It should be possible to include vitest docs and examples in your prompts to teach it in context, did you try that?

Wouldn't Kubernetes and/or Dapr just add even more latency before the packets reach Redis?

It seems like the parent comment's author is implying that Redis is already too slow even when running it on bare metal and connecting directly to it.

Adding additional things like service discovery and proxies in the network path will not speed it up. To speed it up you would need to bring Redis closer, so perhaps you meant using k8 tools like "pod topology spread contraints" to do so (juxtaposing with the default k8 behavior that may spread workloads out in an undesirable manner)?

Simply going from "we are not using k8s" to "we are using k8s" won't speed up latency to Redis.

Lets rephrase this differently, no one can prove whether it “understands” or not, and the same for humans. No one can prove whether consciousness is an “illusion” for humans. Your brain might just use embeddings, too.

If you ask an average person if children understand what a game is, “yes” would be a common answer, but just like an AI model it may not have enough focus to play the game properly.

I believe this is the whole point behind “the turing test”.

If you instead argued it can’t experience emotion, i would agree.

No its not the same concept (Which is what the article actually says, despite the click bait title)

Feature flags - roll this out to 1% of users, randomly selected; roll this out to users with X hardware in Y region, etc.

Authorization - only users of the admin role can edit other users

As a concrete example, you might authorize some cohort of users as admins. Within that cohort you want to vary the UI for your admin app by using a feature flag controlling whether to use the old React app or a new Angular rewrite you are rolling out in tranches.

Conflating these concepts might work in some cases, but doesnt scale. Its like saying pods, services, deployments in k8s are all the same thing just because you haven’t yet seen a use case where the difference matters. Its not hard to imagine a use case where rolling out a feature necessitates tediously duplicating your ACL rules if you’re using ACL to gate rollout of features.

The counter argument is if you just ask it, it will readily explain what a game is.

How do we know you (as a human) actually know what a game is? I would have to test your knowledge and/or take your word for it.

Maybe even more powerful would be reducing the number of examples needed to learn, eg less than one shot

https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/10/16/1010566/ai-machi...

updating weights in real time is useless if each update basically does nothing because it takes an insurmountable amount of training, on the other hand if i can give my model a succinct “lesson” i’d then be very willing to wait a while for it to “process”

Disagree

I tried to use lambda. Cold startup really is awful. You have to deal with running db migrations in step functions or find other solutions. The aurora serverless also does not scale to zero. Once you get traffic you overload RDS and need to pay for and setup a RDS proxy, and dont get me started on the pointless endeavor of trying to keep your lambdas warm. Sort of defeats the point. Serverless is not actually serverless and ends up costing more for less performance and more complexity

Its way simpler and cheaper to start with a single VPS single point of failure, then over time graduate to running docker compose or a single node k3 cluster on that VPS. And then eventually scale out to more nodes…

Yes it allows strings or references to the function. My issue is that since the former is allowed, either people start using that method, or you have to start a “debate” within your team about patterns to avoid.

The serializability of your state itself has nothing to do with how events are bound to callback functions. If you serialize a string name of a function and not the source code of that function this buys you nothing. The source code itself is all text, so its serializable no matter whether the code is suitable for being statically analyzed