0xy

The quantity over quality argument has substantially broken down in the last 6 months especially. SOTA models outperform the vast majority of engineers at engineering tasks, let alone everything else they're also exceptional at, including system design, incident recovery, DevOps, etc.

This is because these models act as a productivity enhancer for engineers. A 1x engineer becomes 5x. A 10x becomes 50x. And so on.

Slop is a risk that can be mitigated through team policy, skills and other mechanisms. Nothing we produce is slop, in fact incidents are down dramatically. It's more stable than ever.

Nobody is measuring LOCs. They're up, but that's barely relevant to me. I'd rather measure defect rate, rollback rate, sprint velocity, roadmap adherence etc. Those measure actual progress.

I don't use LOCs as a reason to manage people out. But if they're vehemently refusing to even try AI, other metrics will make it obvious that they're falling behind.

Sure. Number of rollbacks, number of incidents, Jira velocity, adherence to roadmaps, tickets completed, PRs merged, PR review time.

Every satellite internet provider other than Starlink is complete garbage. Slow, unreliable, useless.

I'll be straight up. I have been responsible for performance conversations and hiring decisions, and I use both of these as a tool to ensure that engineers on my team are using AI.

The window for the gunslinging no-AI coder sitting in the basement with Mountain Dew and cranking out thousands of lines a day is essentially closed now.

My previous superstar 10x engineers are now superstar 50x engineers thanks to AI-enhanced output. All metrics are up. There's also no negative effects either, in fact incidents and faults have declined.

This position is the equivalent of the delivery driver in the early 1900s who refused to get an automobile and instead insisted his horse and cart is better.

Know that if you oppose a productivity tool that transforms every other engineer, you will be managed out. I've seen it happen more than once already.

If you stop giving us boatloads of cash with zero accountability we'll support terrorists.

A very small fraction will actually take it. You're wrongly considering the headline number.

That doesn't seem comparable. The DNC and RNC were hacked by different actors.

My point was that this news is of the hack, and not of bombshell revelations from the emails themselves, which kind of indicates there's nothing there.

If you found the smoking gun, you would say "look I found a smoking gun!".

If we're blaming the victim for being hacked, shouldn't we blame the DNC too?

India's local authorities and government know about, enable and protect this activity.

Local Indian police stations routinely ignore reports on scam call centers, for instance.

I know people who work in retail outlets and banks and when older people come in to withdraw large amounts of cash, wire to suspicious accounts or buy thousands in gift cards even after specifically being told they're being scammed they'll insist on proceeding, even after a bank manager sit-down.

Doesn't explain the lack of SARs, which they are legally obligated to file in that case.

Reuters made the same rudimentary error. Capital One never said that in any filing. They said the opposite, that they have never revealed ANY reason.

You can read the filings yourself, or review the notable lack of SARs in the FinCEN leaks.

Capital One is obligated to file SARs in the event of money laundering. They did not do so.

AVIF is a lifesaver for animation with separate transparency layers so the transparency can change position frame by frame. The only other alternative is WebM which has Safari limitations.

There's the commutations of habitual fraudsters and Ponzi scheme operators prison sentences, some of whom bragged about 'spending a lot of money on politics', for instance.

Specifically, Babubhai Patel and Gregory McKnight.