NASB is there an xcancel but for medium dot com?
this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)
TechTakes
1397 readers
187 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
saw you already got two answers, another answer: medium's stupid popover blocker is based on a counter value in a cookie that you could can blow up yourself (or get around with instance windows)
I am a very big fan of the Fx Temporary Containers extension
I didn't even know about the temporary containers extension. that'll be very useful for so much stuff. Thanks as well!
yeah for some reason it's not very well known, which is why I tell people about it. I'm 90% done with my months-ago-promised browser post, and should have it up soon
couple last-minute irks came up recently as I was doing some stuff, so now I'm trying to figure out whether those have answers or not..
years ago on a trip to nyc, I popped in at the aws loft. they had a sort of sign-in thing where you had to provide email address, where ofc I provided a catchall (because I figured it was a slurper). why do I tell this mini tale? oh, you know, just sorta got reminded of it:
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 07:22:05 +0000
From: Amazon Web Services <aws-marketing-email-replies@amazon.com>
To: <snip>
Subject: Are you ready to capitalize on generative AI?
(e: once again lost the lemmy formatting war)
Are you ready to capitalize on generative AI?
Hell yeah!
I'm gonna do it: GENERATIVE AI. Look at that capitalization.
there’s no way you did that without consulting copilot or at least ChatGPT. thank you sam altman for finally enabling me to capitalize whole words in my editor!
yes, i actually never learned how to capitalize properly, they told me to use capslock and shift, but that makes all the letters come out small still. thanks chatgpt.
my IDE, notepad.exe, didn’t support capitalizing words until they added copilot to it. so therefore qed editors couldn’t do that without LLMs. computer science is so easy!
For a moment I misread your post and had to check notepadplusplus for AI integration. Don't scare me like that
fortunately, notepad++ hasn’t (yet) enshittified. it’s fucking weird we can’t say the same about the original though
I'd argue that you cannot say basic notepad has enshittified, as it always was quite shit. That is why 9 out of 10 dentists recommend notepad++
there's a difference between "barebones"[0] and this shit
[0] - I will grant you that notepad used to be abysmal about handling unicode in the before time, but it's been less-fucked since at least XP or so iirc
Fellas, my in laws gave me a roomba and it so cute I put googly eyes on it. I'm e/acc now
On bsky you are required to post proof of cat, here at e/acc you are required to post proof of googly roomba
please be very careful with the VSLAM (camera+sensors) ones, and note carefully that iRobot avoided responsibility for this by claiming the impacted people were testers (a claim the alleged testers appear to disagree with)
e/vac
this isn’t surprising, but it turns out that when tested, LLMs prove to be ridiculously terrible at summarizing information compared with people
I'm sure every poster who's ever popped in to tell us about how extremely useful and good LLMs are for this are gonna pop in realsoonnow
If those kids could read they'd be very upset
I read the white paper for this data centers in orbit shit https://archive.ph/BS2Xy and the only mentions of maintenance seem to be "we're gonna make 'em more reliable" and "they should be easy to replace because we gonna make 'em modular"
This isn't a white paper, it's scribbles on a napkin
Design principles for a time machine
Yes, a real, proper time machine like in sci-fi movies. Yea I know how to build it, as this design principles document will demonstrate. Remember to credit me for my pioneering ideas when you build it, ok?
- Feasibility: if you want to build a time machine, you will have to build a time machine. Ideally, the design should break as few laws of physics as possible.
- Goodness: the machine should be functional, robust, and work correctly as much as necessary. Care should be taken to avoid defects in design and manufacturing. A good time machine is better than a bad time machine in some key aspects.
- Minimize downsides: the machine should not cause exessive harm to an unacceptable degree. Mainly, the costs should be kept low.
- Cool factor: is the RGB lighting craze still going? I dunno, flame decals or woodgrain finish would be pretty fun in a funny retro way.
- Incremental improvement: we might wanna start with a smaller and more limited time machine and then make them gradually bigger and better. I may or may not have gotten a college degree allowing me to make this mindblowing observation, but if I didn't, I'll make sure to spin it as me being just too damn smart and innovative for Harvard Business School.
You joke, but my startup is actually moving forward on this concept. We already made a prototype time travel machine which while only being able to travel forward does so at a promising stable speed (1). The advances we made have been described by the people on our team with theoretical degrees in physics as simply astonishing, and awe-inspiring. We are now in an attempt to raise money in a series B financing round, and our IPO is looking to be record breaking. Leave the past behind and look forward to the future, invest in our timetravel company xButterfly.
there’s so much wrong with this entire concept, but for some reason my brain keeps getting stuck on (and I might be showing my entire physics ass here so correct me if I’m wrong): isn’t it surprisingly hard to sink heat in space because convection doesn’t work like it does in an atmosphere and sometimes half of your orbital object will be exposed to incredibly intense sunlight? the whitepaper keeps acting like cooling all this computing shit will be easier in orbit and I feel like that’s very much not the case
also, returning to a topic I can speak more confidently on: the fuck are they gonna do for a network backbone for these orbital hyperscale data centers? mesh networking with the implicit Kessler syndrome constellation of 1000 starlink-like satellites that’ll come with every deployment? two way laser comms with a ground station? both those things seem way too unreliable, low-bandwidth, and latency-prone to make a network backbone worth a damn. maybe they’ll just run fiber up there? you know, just run some fiber between your satellites in orbit and then drop a run onto the earth.
everyone who's ever done physical cabling knows aaallll about dropping cables upward
Easy, the cables go into the space elevator. Why do you all have to be so negative, don't you have any vision for the future?