throwaway8481

I think the opposite side of this coin is that the company should clearly define the minimum lifetime of the product and it support, including what services they will provide upon its sunset (such as a partial refund and disposal if the product folds before that date). I want to make an informed decision, and like you I would shop for another product beyond this crap we subscribe to.

At my work, I often see these 2 things throughout the codebase:

- an identifier for an environment variable that gives us the azure key vault scope (another identifier) - an identifier for the token to pull from that scope

Then the scope name and token name are used to pull the token secret value using the secrets api.

I am not experienced in how this is "supposed to be". Would it make sense to make both of these environment variables so neither identifier appears directly in code? (scope name and token name)

Thank you for the insight :)

Yep. California DMV. 1 in 10 Americans live in California and these companies have our data.

Tangentially, I really dislike walking into the DMV and seeing ads from private companies. I heavily dislike that ID checking and document verification is done by ID.me and others for what is a public service I pay for through my taxes.

Maybe for a while I can avoid submitting my documents and information to partners-of-the-DMV, but just like airport security it's a convenience tax. They do not value your time, and they will demonstrate it by putting you through extra hoops to coerce you into giving them everything.

LinkedIn was never perfect. It worked for some who had extensive people networks to bring to the platform, but the platform itself was always hot garbage. I still tell younger folk about the days when they would spam your entire address book. I'm still seen as the loony in my peer circle for having no LinkedIn presence. It's an industry standard of hot garbage.

> Model outputs are untrusted input.

I think the problem is they're trying to introduce nuance and a narrow path to allow this. They want an acceptable level of risk to using untrusted model output for the efficiency/productivity gains it will bring, notwithstanding hallucinations.

Generative AI would not have flown in the security theater of Yesteryear, but CTOs see productivity multipliers.

I believe in you.

I've struggled with ending my shift and mentally checking out of work. However, I wouldn't impose going back to the office on others who can do this effectively. I think the comment is about maintaining a work-from-some-office-space capability.

What is with the defeatism? It all starts somewhere. I moved on from desktop computers 10+ years ago. I've only owned laptops, and I've stayed on laptops because I cannot do "everything" to a reasonable practicality on smartphones. This is one of those pieces I need.

It's not fast today, but it's possible and portable.

I feel like I should say something about discord not being a suitable replacement for a forum or bugtracker.

I feel like motion blur should be used like mouse acceleration. Like you said: If I whip my head around quickly that image should present clearly and immediately. However, if I'm in a car or flying through the air (in a game) this may distort the image as I'm glancing. This is the kind of drag-as-you-accelerate blur I'm expecting, and it can really make a fast-paced moment look that much more exciting. Motion blur is poorly executed everywhere.

Could they just package ollama and build a Python GTK interface around the CLI interface?