speleding

I read an article about a house that was converted to use DC instead of AC as a trial. The most surprising part to me was that most household appliances simply kept working because they already contain a AC/DC rectifier anyway which works fine if you connect it to DC.

Although I agree inference will become cheap (probably not zero), it's quite possible that there is a moat they can build around understanding customer context.

With each query OpenAI and Anthropic get more context about their users. When I compare answers between AIs the ChatGPT answer often includes useful things it inferred from earlier conversations. Losing that context could be a meaningful barrier for a customer to switch to a cheaper service.

The Claude sandbox has a slightly different ENV compared to ChatGPT (LC_CTYPE set to C instead of UTF8 I believe) which upsets some scripts we have.

So in the CLAUDE.MD we tell it about that and then tell it continue reading AGENTS.MD. Not very hard to work around if CLAUDE.MD goes away, but just to support your point that the split did have its uses for some.

That balance probably depends on the human, and the context. If you are a beginner in a field the model should not assume you know what you are doing. On the other hand, for an expert it should try to work out what you mean with your vaguely worded order.

What I think should happen is that it should update its memory with notes on the proficiency level of the user, so it gets the balance right over time.

This is a problem if you allow your kids to use your ChatGPT account for homework (and silly pictures), like I do.

There are holding companies with zero employees. They typically pay a management fee to someone.

They now updated it. That bit is indeed gone.

If your app is not too large you can do CI/CD perfectly fine from your laptop. Put it in a docker container if you want to ensure it is perfectly reproducible. You still need Github as the origin repo to pull from, but the "git part" of GitHub seems to be (almost) always up and running. (We use "capistrano" for this)

Well, you would be surprised how many people think that blocking cookies means "no or fewer ads", even people in IT. No tracking, of course, just means it will show less relevant ads, not fewer of them.

So I'm not onboard with the "just block everything by default" crowd. If you frame the question as "Would you like ads to be more relevant to you" instead of "Do you want to allow tracking" you probably get a very different answer from users.

I would like the cookie banner to be changed to a browser setting, but I also would like the option to allow some sites to show relevant ads to me.

There is no need to be so fatalistic. Sure, AI will upset the apple cart, especially in our little corner, but the economy is built on pricing scarce resources and even if many things become abundant, most other things will remain scarce. There are only so many Manhattan penthouses or Rembrandts (dixit the Economist), so things of value remain, and it will be quite some time before a humanoid can fix the plumbing, so valuable labour will remain as well.

I, for one, am excited to see what the future holds. (side note: I live in a European country with a strong social safety net, I imagine that helps being unafraid)

I like the proposal, but I agree they could have sold it better.

This is basically a GET request that can have a body. I've found myself in need of that more than once when I did not want huge URLs with encoded data showing up in logs. Using POST request there is not appropriate because it signals data could be modified (i.e. cannot be sent to read-only instances). I guess modifying the spec to allow GET to have a body would pose too many problems.

The ideal solution for all this is would be what the Japanese have: a population trained to just throw garbage in the bin instead of on the ground. I don't think I've heard any politician who is even considering measures to get there. He would get my vote.

I agree that the government should do IT in house, ideally, because it's a core business for them. The reality is that it is very hard to attract and retain good IT staff on a government salary. The people who need to manage all that in a cost-effective way are especially hard to find.

So we end up with expensive consultants doing the work. Consultants have the wrong incentive. They don't want to stay in one place to long because it looks bad on their resume and overruns mean more money for them.

So really, I can see why a seasoned politician chooses the safest option for him. By the time an overrun occurs he will have moved on to the next job. I don't think left or right-wing politics has much to do with this dynamic. How will a left-wing politician magically get capable IT staff that higher paying industry can't even get enough of?

It's important to add the context that whenever our government tries to do something by themselves it ends up late and severely over budget.

So you have to weigh the risks of outsourcing to the risk of the whole thing becoming very late and very expensive. The risks around outsourcing are something further down the line, the risks of everything becoming expensive and late are something that will give the responsible politician a headache now.

The US-made Ultra UV light source is important, but there is quite a bit more than that to a $380 million lithography machine. (Otherwise someone would have created a competitor by now.)

Most economists think that tariffs are not a good way to collect tax, because it distorts incentives far more than e.g. a tax on wealth or property.