> Redis' parent company just signed its own death warrant.

They may well have done, and that'll be a shame - they've been good custodians of it until this.

A forked version (can we call it Radish?) seems likely. Even Redis Inc have struggled to invent any new features, so the fork will likely be plenty for most people. The plugin system in Redis 7 might see some clever stuff getting integrated, but the likes of the cloud providers would most likely never support such a thing anyway, so they can carry on serving up "vanilla" Raddish.

As a side note, I can't imagine ever needing any paid support for Redis - people obviously do pay for it, but I wonder what they get from doing so?

Pricing is hard - if you put it too low, you don't make as many billions. If you put it too high, you also don't make as many billions, and you look like an utter dick.

Looks like they went with the second option.

When I last looked at this, the traditional ELK stack wasn't so easy - they're trying to take a lot of stuff "back in house" and are making licensing difficult as a result.

I'd personally suggest Graylog (even if they can't spell "grey"). It's not really better or worse, but it seemed like it was a bit closer to the free world than ELK. There's another (very much open source) option, which largely runs in a single process - the name escapes me, but it's not really ready for prime time yet, but it's definitely interesting.

As for Splunk, they worked at massive scale (if you wanted it), had all sorts of nifty enterprise friendly features and they were the market leader. I'm not sure I really understand the Cisco fit very well, other than "to get the client list". It was good, it was probably beyond the reach of anyone smaller than "pretty big", but I'll miss it when the inevitable enshitification starts.

Every Tesla taxi driver I've asked has said they've had to get fixed several times, and their car isn't 3 years old yet. It seems high utilisation kills off Teslas pretty quickly - not something perhaps seen by normal-mileage Tesla owners who maybe get a couple of parts fixed during the annual service and think that's perfectly fine.

Accidents are probably much higher in rentals, but if the rental is actually doing what it should and getting high utilisation, it seems Tesla's terrible build quality will have an effect too. We'e heard plenty on slashdot about how Teslas tend to get written off for relatively minor accidents, so I'm sure that adds to the costs too. Hertz bought a lot of Teslas because that's the car people want to rent - the crappy Leafs probably don't have as many problems, but no one wants to rent them.

My take is Hertz bet big on *Tesla* (rather than EVs in general) and that didn't work out so well for them. That's not necessarily a reason to avoid Teslas for self ownership, it's perhaps more of a statement about Teslas limitations though.

My prediction... AI will never work for shopping.

I reason this because no store will ever make an AI the users will ever want to use. Stores will always try and push what works for them - not what works for the customer. Taking a simple example, lets say I need to buy some AA batteries. The vendor will always try and push me to whatever makes them the most money or empties their warehouse the quickest, so they'll sell me a big box of batteries, or they'll sell me premium brands, or they'll sell their own brand and try to hype them as being as good as the premium ones - whatever works best for them. Whereas, I would like to buy a smallish pack (so I don't have to spend so much money, and so they don't "go off"), I'm not really bothered by the brand, so long as they actually work well and keep their charge for a long time. Once I've figured that out, I'm price sensitive, so I'll buy the cheapest of the "good looking" ones - whatever any of that means, I'll compare deliver times/costs, etc. Either way, it's almost certainly not in the vendors best interest.

Could a third party (eg. a comparison website) make an AI that works for customers? I suspect probably not for all the same reasons as above. Ultimately, the aggregator relies on the vendor, and the vendor will be pushing their own agenda, so the aggregator will be tainted by that too. The aggregator needs to make money, and so they'll introduce (or persist) biases just like the vendors do.

Could an open source option surface? Maybe, but it'll be beholden to vendor data, so would probably struggle like the aggregators would.

Aside from the obvious vendor biases, I suspect the buying decision is also actually insanely complex - I'm wondering if it might be a problem like self-driving cars - it looks simple on the outside, but it proves to be really, really difficult to get right. If you've ever seen someone pick an apple at the supermarket, you'll know that some people seem to have a lot of unpublished, and largely irrational variables in their buying decisions. Getting all of that right seems like it'll be very, very hard.

All true - but if they were to commercialise and actually make it good, then having a cluster of machines that wake up at the right times, run jobs and report results could be a handy feature of many application stacks. Of course, we all do the same already, except our current solutions all suffer from problems if things crash, or if inputs are out of range or whatever. We've glossed over and 'normalised' those problems for so long we probably don't even know we have a problem that could do with a decent solution.

There's obviously a lot of 'hypetrain' going on here, and there's no specific need for a whole new OS to solve the problems they're solving, but if they make a decent solution, then it's still a decent solution. I rather hope they don't over-cook this whole thing and actually come through with something, but the cynic in me thinks they'll do the usual VC-backed hype-to-the-max and then produce nothing of any real use.

https://developers.slashdot.or...

As last time... it's good, probably better than any other LLM at writing code and doing technical tasks, but it sure as shit isn't as good as you're making out.

This lot have some bold claims - namely that it can produce entire programs, rather than just a few functions (their example is that it can write simple games). Also, they claim that it's done some of the jobs on Upwork.

Personally, this one needs a good deal of salt. The claim about Upwork is likely only true after you've spent some time talking to the client to work out what they meant in the job spec and then maybe iterated a handful of solutions until you got something that looks about right. The thing they likely have right is the quality of the output will be similar to a lot of Upwork responders ;-)

To boil this down, I think they've made a super-focussed model that's good at coding tasks (and probably terrible at telling you about celebrity gossip). They've presumably coupled that with some ability to test or evaluate the code it generates to see if it meets the brief - that's quite cool, if it's anything like I've described it.

MH370 is something of a modern mystery. It's also been a significant 'wake up' call to remind us that we don't know everything - even in something as heavily monitored and tracked as an airliner. That it seems to have disappeared so completely, and even after this much time hasn't given up its secrets is really the stuff of conspiracy novels.

I really do hope it is found - but my guess is it'll be found by accident now, rather than because anyone was specifically looking for it. By then,

All probably true, but this is something akin to clearing out the typing pool. That is, a big business has a handful of people who "do cashflow". They work out how much money needs to be in any one bank account at any given moment. Any spare money gets put to work in some way or other - some of that work is long term, some is short term. The cashflow folks job is to make sure there's as much money being made as possible, but that they can always cover their payments when they're due - so it's a juggling act of moving money around different accounts, moving it into investments of different types and then pulling it out of those investments when they mature, or when the money's needed somewhere (accepting there'll be a financial penalty for pulling out of an investment early).

This is absolutely an area where "AI" can help - most likely some ML and statistical modelling (rather than an LLM). In fairness, JPMorgan are in the process of productising something that's very specialised, quite hard to do (because it's specialised, and because there's no "dev environment" to try it on), and potentially could make businesses a bit of extra money, and save a bit of headcount.

How that means entire businesses can go to 3.5 day weeks I'm not really sure. My guess is humans leave a lot of money in accounts that doesn't need to be there (humans thinking "just in case" and "CYA"), where computers have much less worries on that score. As such, the computers can move more money into investments, and can probably predict the time the money will be required more accurately (ie. again without the fear-factor overhead a human would add). All that means more money for the business, but I'm still not sure how thousands of people would suddenly have more leisure time as a result.

> What users look for in a battery

Well, we have regulators, who represent users. And they rather like "recyclable", because they look for the whole product to be recyclable in some sort of way because we don't like nasty things in our landfills, and we recognise that we can't just ship it all off to the developing world for them to have it in their (unmanaged) landfills instead.

This raises some interesting questions though... Lets say I have a 1PB of data in AWS today. I've decided that Google plays golf better than Bezos, so I'm going to move to GCP. My minions have built a bit of the environment in GCP, and we're ready to start filling it with data.

How does anyone proceed *and* get the close-your-account-benefits? You're not going to say to AWS "close my account" on a Friday, shut everything down and then just pop up on GCP on the Monday - you'll need weeks, or more likely months of cut-over time. That could make that data transfer hard to distinguish from, say, a dual-provider setup where you replicate from one to the other.

No such hard rules here, but the same general approach. We have a "no devices at the table" rule, which has always held from day 1 (the most distraction we might use at the table is a card game or something). If we're out somewhere, then no devices unless its to take a picture or something - no doom scrolling when you should be looking around you. That may change in their teens, but we'll resist as long as we can.

We've also always talked to our children as much like adults as was appropriate. We didn't "dumb down" stuff, we just broke it down into terms they could understand (it was fun to explain Brexit, the pandemic, the Ukraine war, and now The Israel/Gaza war). We have two kids that can competently talk with adults or other children, and have a lot of knowledge about a lot of things - real knowledge, down to how things work sort of level. One of them reads books like there's no tomorrow, and consequently has a huge vocabulary. The other is a constant talker, so gets to exercise her vocab that way ;-)

As a side note, there's a show on Netflix about pets "super skills". There's a bit about the rabbit that paints and whatnot (mostly on youtube, and seemingly hollywood inhabitants love it). The rabbits owner sums it up nicely - if you stimulate your rabbits brain, it'll learn to do more and more stuff. You just just get your rabbit out of the hutch and expect it to paint, that won't work. So too with humans ;-)

My family and I had a "pink elephant" conversation a while back where everyone described what they could "see" if you say "think of a pink elephant".

My own case, I know there's a pink elephant there, but I can't really see it. If you ask me about its trunk, I can sort of 'zoom in', and I know there's a trunk there, but I can't really see it. I can describe it having wrinkles or whatever because I know them to be there, and I can sort of see them as I'm describing them, but then the rest of the elephant is lost, other than me knowing it is there.

I can't draw for toffee, possibly because I don't know "how things go" (as my school art teacher called it). But I can "feel" my way to things - that is, I can't really "see" anything, but I know the direction to go in, the steps to take and the outcome it'll provide. I can't tell you the "shape" of those thoughts, but I know them - and more often than not, they're actually well formed and "correct" (for different versions of "correct").

Back to the family conversation - the main thing is that whatever it is you do, be good at doing it, and that's all that anyone can ever ask.

These kids need to know what a proper Rock Star actually is.

Sure, you've got your Mick Jaggers, and even Taylor Swifts, with their go-here-do-this-go-there-do-that lifestyles, and their free spirited creativity, but they're not REAL rock stars - nope, the real rock stars have to work in an beige office 5 days a week, and if they're really lucky, we'll make them wear a shirt and tie too - that's really rockin' and stickin' it to the man.

They should rename their company to "Conformity and Compliance Games". Oh, and rename the GTA franchise to "Do as You're Told".