tonnydourado

I might be missing something, but what are the non-questionable, or at least non-evil, uses of this technology? Because every single application I can think of is fucked up: porn, identity theft, impersonation, replacing voice actors, stealing the likeness of voice actors, replacing customer support without letting the customers know you're using bots.

I guess you could give realistic voices to people that lost their voices by using old recordings, but there's no way that this is a market that justify the investment.

God, please, not to Oracle.

> Certainly they can (...)

No, that's the problem. You don't have certainty, not in any remotely scientific definition of the word, because you don't have enough data, and the data you do have is crap.

Also:

> I see no evidence that they can't self reflect

I see no evidence that there isn't a magical invisible unicorn in the sky that grants wishes to those who wear unicorn themed underwear, so, it must exist.

I don't have a problem with you doing and even sharing whatever cargo culting prompting technique you want to share.

My problem starts when you make bold claims like "LLMs can self reflect" and your only evidence is "I asked one and it said yes".

People really need to understand that your single/double digit dataset of interactions with an inherently non-deterministic process is less than irrelevant. It's saying that global warming isn't real because it was really cold this week.

I don't even know enough superlatives to express how irrelevant it is that "it seems to you" that an LLM behaves this way or that.

And even the "protocol" in question is weak. Self reported data is not that trustworthy even with humans, and arguably there's a much stronger base of evidence to support the assumption that we can self-reflect.

In conclusion: please, stop.

> you saw them walking out the door with a box of their stuff

That's cool, I've never seen anyone that worked in a 90's movie before!

Seriously, though, is that a thing? Was it ever?

I'm not sure I get this.

If it's in my team/department, I'll know about it one way or another. If not ... Why would I care? People come and go, and if we're friends outside of work, we'll have other channels.

Besides that, most companies I worked at don't even maintain the LDAP/whatever properly. I've seen contacts from people that left/were fired stay around for years.

> Give Pika a try

snorts in Brazilian

Helm becoming a de facto tool is up there with null in the top biggest mistakes our industry committed.

Browser based terminals look like one of those bad ideas that people just refuse to give up on. Like singletons and graphical imperative programming.

> Programming isn't work, it's meta work

This is either profoundly insightful of absolute bollocks, but I don't think I'll be able to tell which before the next 5 years.

I think you might be confusing sprint review with sprint retrospective? What you describe is the sprint retrospective, and when teams are autonomous enough to actually act on their pain points, it's easily the most useful scrum ceremony, IMHO.

Sprint reviews are really kinda just a wankfest where people show nice graphs and demos for an audience that either already knows or doesn't care.

Some of those are obvious, but in a strange "and yet I haven't thought of it that way" way. Some are reasonable advice.

"You can dissect a cadaver" was genuinely unexpected.

Nothing against specific professional help, like personal trainer, but I think "Hire a coach" belongs more in the "Things to not waste your money on" list.

And last, but not least: "Follow up many times. You won’t make people mad if you’re polite" is just wrong, I'm usually mentally cursing persistent recruiters by the time they follow up for the third (and, thankfully, usually, last) time. I'll report as spam in every conceivable way anyone that goes further than that.

I'm still flabbergasted that anyone in the face of the planet even considers doing a colonoscopy without sedation.

Cool! I'm still on the plantuml train, but I like how much easier mermaid is to integrate with (no need for java), so I'm happy to see it evolve!

As an avid plantuml user, I don't think it's that simple. Graph layouts help, but it doesn't take long for automatic layouts to start to get in the way of conveying meaning, and that's even with a higher level description language, like plantuml or mermaid, let alone with raw graphviz. One can quickly start to spend more time trying to make the layout look right than actually evolving it.

Don't have a solution to it, unfortunately. When things in my head start to map too poorly to plantuml, I just consider drawio instead, but it's such a downgrade, that I try to avoid as much as I can.

I guess it goes without saying that it's not the mythical rainbow bridge connecting Asgard to Midgard

> that the thing about ketamine/psilocybin/etc that is helping with depression is not some latent property of the molecule, but rather the actual transcendent experience

I thought the same thing when reading the article, but then I started to wonder how the fuck would you double blind that?

What is wrong* with all these folks putting December at the top? Clearly it should be January at the top, then clockwise.

* I know.

> Unlike CI, Kargo deployment pipelines are not generic “jobs” (...). Instead, Kargo Stages are used to model your environments (...)

I didn't see an explanation of how Stages are different than jobs. Every single usage of Stage could have been replaced with job and the meaning would stay the same.

The data and DevOps marketing people really need to drop the buzzwordism.

There's absolutely no meaningful, practical, distinction between those terms pretty much anywhere in the world.

I think I'd have a hard time coming up with a feature I wanted less than this even if I tried.

I'm all for evidence based medicine, but I don't think the authors could make me trust them less if they tried.

Under all the studies cited and the scientific analysis there's this subtle, yet clear, gnarly conservative discourse that can be summed up as "Therapy? Be a man, would you?".

And if that's not enough, there are all the ... I lost count how many, subtle logical jumps that seem reasonable for the sake of argument and brevity, but if you spend more than a second on it make you go "wait, that's right".

> If you yourself struggle to define what 'performance' means in your job, isn't that a red flag all by itself?

No? How do you define the performance of a doctor? Nurse? Teacher? Developer? Tech Support?

Most of these roles have metrics that might seem like easy and foolproof ways to measure performance, but ask anyone that has actually worked any of these professions for more than 2 min, and you'll have endless tails of management fucking everything up by chasing a dumb number.

If your job matters in the slightest, it's not that rare for performance to be wildly elusive to measure.

Y'all are really telling on yourselves by shitting on OP. It's all about defending freedom of speech until the speech is a gay furry communist telling the army to fuck off.

Should OP have tweeted as they did, specially while attending an event *on behalf* of their employer? Yeah, it is asking for trouble. Yeah, the company does have a right to fire them.

What should be extremely grinding y'all gears though is:

1. A government employee should NEVER be the initiator of such an event. Even if it's legal, smells A LOT like the government trying to silence citizens.

2. The minute the company says "we'll accept your resignation" and tried to get out of paying what OP was owed, they become the bad guys, doesn't matter how obnoxious OP might be. If you wanna fire someone, have the balls to actually fire them and pay up whatever was agreed to in the contract.

I'll give a bit of a pass on 2, because a lot of HN commenters are Americans, and Americans are brainwashed by their shitty work laws, they lost perspective of what is fair in an employer/employee relationship.

But 1? Reverse the ideologies and this post would've been front page for 3 weeks.

The risk is not "being punished under a new law for things your business did before the law existed". The risk is "there's a new law that made your whole business model illegal, now what?"

Ah, ok. That's kind of what I meant by upfront design, though. Yeah, mapping this out is gonna suck, but it's better than having it hidden in a bunch of ifs.

Not sure what you mean by multidimensional states?

I work with non-distributed (ish) systems, and I use watered down class diagrams much more often than sequence diagrams.

But even when I was working on more distributed systems, I found more value in state machines and simplified class diagrams, actually. I think most cases where you're using a sequence diagram, a state machine is a better tool. Both for thought, and for implementation. Surfacing implicit state machines can require some extra upfront design, but if you have a non-trivial amount of states, it's pretty much guaranteed to be worth it.

Also, I have the impression that movie making is a fairly cascade-like process. You pitch a movie, you make the movie, you deliver the movie. There are stories of extreme change in requirements, but they seem rare.

Meanwhile in IT, you pitch a movie, you find that the movie is solving the wrong problem, or doesn't have market fit, or the requirements were wrong, you adjust, repeat this a thousand times, and in the end you deliver a comic book with a qr code that links to a web series on YouTube.