I think any dramatic change from how you currently run things to a different way is full of risk. Just because it's Linux doesn't really do much in the face of who knows how much hard coded this or that they accumulated in their infrastructure management.

People's infrastructure management tends to be ugly and locked in to how they do it in various ways.

Azure may be utterly capable, but any difference is a huge headache, particularly the longer the 'old ways' went on and how many people along the way left the company.

It was widely rumored that in 1998 Microsoft tried to force Hotmail to use Microsoft infrastructure and met with predictably miserable results. Hotmail was more about trying to show off their infrastructure products that as an offering in and of itself.

Microsoft might be a bit more conflicted on github, but clearly that sentiment persists.

I live in Utah... I wonder what effect this will have on my power prices.

Unfortunately looks like they are sufficiently impatient they've pivoted to trying to fire up more coal instead...

Most bubbles are rooted in something real, the dotcom, the housing market. You do have things like crypto that is more purely fictional, but most mainstream bubbles are rooted in real stuff..

At this point, about 35% of the SP500 is pretty directly predicated on AI. That's way too much across the board.

Probably no coincidence he felt compelled to write after the Friday crash. Wasn't related to AI but since about 35% of the S&P 500 is concentrated in AI concerns, it's particularly vulnerable to general stock disruption.

You might be right about the rest, but the Aptera is far more efficient than a Model 3. The published numbers put it at about 110 Wh/mile, while the Model 3 is at 230 Wh/mile. And, frankly, the Aptera numbers seem a little high for a vehicle with a 0.13 drag coeffiecient and with one less wheel. I think the Aptera design should be able to do better than 100 Wh/mile. Obviously, it's hard to make an accurate comparison between a real-world car and one that is basically vaporware, but something would have to be seriously screwed up for a design as light and aerodynamic as the Aptera to be barely better than a Model 3.

I'd buy one if they ever get around to making them. I've been wanting to buy one for 15 years.

I presume it varies greatly based on your area and task.

If you are slapping together a thin generic webui over a milquetoast sql database in a boilerplate-heavy language/framework, then sure I could see massive speedups.

In my particular area, the most unobtrusively useful enhancement is letting it take a crack at a 'code review' before I push it for real. One time it did catch something that would have gone unnoticed that wouldn't have come up for a long time and then it would have been annoying. However earlier today it started going nuts highlighting code that I hadn't changed and insisting that all the variables were named 'dict' and that was a bad idea and should be renamed. Nothing was named dict, the word dict didn't even appear in the codebase it was looking at.

If getting started on something unfamiliar, I *might* do a prompt and then reference that for things to potentially look up. I first started trying to do that and fixing up the result, but ultimately decided that outcome from prompt was harder to salvage than to just throw out and maybe use it as a reference.

I have had moderately more success in letting it predict the next few lines, though it often gets very opinionated about something very wrong. It also tends to assume incorrect things about interfaces that I deal with, interfaces that *should* have been verbatim in their training material.

Locally, yes, but the moisture that is accumulating previously evaporated and went somewhere else. What will the impact be there? Very hard to say.

That is essentially what happened. They didn't fire 35%, those 35% just transferred their reports to others and became ICs (Individual Contributors).

The 35% figure at Google is misleading. The vast majority of those people weren't pure managers they were software engineers who managed small teams as part of their duties while also doing productive technical work. A policy requiring a minimum of 5 direct reports for each manager was put in place, forcing all of those people to decide to either increase their management and cease doing significant technical work or cease being managers and focus entirely on technical work. Many chose the latter option, often quite happily (there is no additional pay or other concrete benefit to being a manager vs being an IC (individual contributor)). This partitioning of people who were in mixed roles into roles that were either managerial or technical provided most of the reduction in line and middle management.

Yes, I expect Alphabet would decline. I worked there for 15 years and understand the culture and motivations pretty well. Culturally, doing something like that would cut against the grain, hard. Pragmatically, they wouldn't like to oppose the administration but they'd get a lot more PR mileage out of leaking the request and publicly declaring their opposition than it would cost them.

It's been mangled by culture.

Once upon a time, it was unambiguously a pretty debilitating mental state. If you had that diagnosis, everyone could see issues and it wasn't at all something that anyone would aspire to.

Then Asperger's came along and thus began the 'diagnosis as an excuse for selfish behavior'. The general impression was "a smart person who has a tendency to be a jerk", which sounded totally awesome to a lot of people. They didn't need to try not to be a jerk, they had a pass in the diagnosis. People *wanted* this diagnosis.

Then, at least in part, some felt that Asperger's had become a very coveted 'diagnosis', and self-diagnosis was popular. They said 'oh, you know what, maybe if we group it with general autism, maybe people would be more reluctant to want that association, and it can go to being an aid for those that needed it.

But no, bereft of their diagnosis, they would instead do the same with autism, really diluting it and making a lot of people end up not taking autism seriously.

Nowadays, Gen Z highly values 'neurodivergent' as a badge of honor, that anyone cool *must* be neurodivergent.

So we end up with everyone saying they have a diagnosis, that they are neurodivergent, and they absolutely are not anything so pedestrian as 'normal'. Meanwhile those that really need it are generally taken less seriously because it's been diluted so much.