https://www.propublica.org/article/draftkings-sports-gamblin...
15,722 karma · joined December 29, 2009
Book: https://www.manning.com/books/terraform-in-depth
Portfolio: https://projects.tedivm.com/
Github: https://github.com/tedivm
BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/tedivm.com
Fediverse: https://hachyderm.io/@tedivm
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/roberthafner
Comments are my own and not those of my employer.
https://www.propublica.org/article/draftkings-sports-gamblin...
This is something I've seen happen a lot with Google- their employees (especially the director+ folks) are absolutely rabid on social media when it comes to defending their products, and they don't let little things like "facts" get in the way.
Google needs to get a better social media policy because they look like clowns when they do this.
I'm a bit disappointed that they didn't call out how much bullshit was in that statement. They are just changing the default settings for new customers. That's it. All the deployed cameras remain the same, and new customers can just toggle those settings off of the defaults. It is so obvious that they were attempting to get credit for doing nothing, and reporters should call that out.
There is no separate enterprise platform unless you buy their self hosted server product.
That said if the only issue is time, researchers will just run their automated analysis through machines with dates in the future alongside their normal tests.
The 35B model is an MoE (mixture of experts), which uses only a subset of parameters at a time. The 27b one is slower but has way better performance.
This is completely backwards, at least with OpenSearch and Valkey. AWS didn't create the forks until after the upstream projects changed their license, so it's really weird to say that the forks "resulted" in the license changes when those forks where a response to the license changes. With Valkey in particular it was members of the former redis core development team that created Valkey.
The Purpose of a System is What it Does[1].
Whether malicious or not, the system does what it does. If people wanted it to do something else they would change the system. The reality is that when corporations make mistakes that benefit them those mistakes rarely get fixed without some sort of public outcry, turning the "mistake" into a "feature".
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...
Regardless of the reason, it's undeniable that GitHub is facing some serious issues. The unofficial status page[1] tells a horrifying story.
I would absolutely love to get some insider perspective on this (if only to learn how to prevent it from happening anywhere I work), but I think it's clear to anyone who has been paying any attention that GitHub is a sinking ship and the only reason people haven't abandoned it already is inertia. Considering how much else is changing in software right now I don't think inertia is enough to sustain a company.