Comment Re: 1970 (Score 1) 98
If they don't know what their inventory is then they're doing it wrong.
If they don't know what their inventory is then they're doing it wrong.
The argument is obvious. They probably didn't think they had to write it out in crayon for you.
It's called golf.
The 72% non-work
That number is not credible. The prompts I write for "personal" purposes are literally indistinguishable from what a worker might make: for all ChatGPT knows I'm an auto mechanic. Location isn't a valid metric either, given WFH, mobile devices, etc. They can't possibly distinguish between work and personal to a one digit of precision. Obviously they can see whether prompts are coming from commercial accounts, paid personal accounts or free tier, but even that gets fuzzy at the low end.
Could you hook the hardware up to a Linux system and then get that data to your applications some other way? Looks like Linux still has firewire support, and you can connect to pipewire with ffado.
without stating that it includes the contributions of users. Why should Exxon be blamed for my choice to go to one of their stations instead of a Shell station?
That's typically disingenuous. Yawn, yawn, yawn.
There's no sobbing in vibe coding.
Just bullshit on top of more bullshit.
There are few wells of propaganda deeper than those of "inflation numbers."
evidence
That, right there.
Just as one minute example of many: did you notice or care that BLS disappeared ~1.7 million US jobs in less than 12 months? "Corrections."
You have no "evidence." What you have is your preferred propaganda. Failure to dutifully inculcate propaganda as "evidence" is the exact opposite of servile.
If you could get a commie (or whatever you'd prefer) elected with the temerity to "just do stuff," you'd follow he/she/it off any number of cliffs as well. Pretend otherwise and show me your perfidity.
The framers put a lot of power in the Executive. The fact that whatever your side might be is incapable of producing actual leaders that can set aside the establishment group-think and leverage this is both a symptom of your sclerotic nature and also a shame. I'm not the simple minded knuckle dragger you presume.
Like did they do that? Whats the evidence or this vibes? Do other nations do it this way?
If they did or didn't wouldn't matter to Trump in any meaningful way. Trump doesn't listen to technocrats until they make the mistake of opposing him. Trump also doesn't given a damn what other nations do or don't.
That's leadership. You may hate him for it, but you can't deny it.
How many people used the XP ugly blue UI even when that was a literal skin over the same Win95 UI and functionally was worse in every way?
What was functionally worse about the XP fisher-price skin? It didn't change any behavior, only appearance.
Has the business world been calling for this?
I can't recall any business moguls jumping up and down about this. On the other hand, I haven't heard anyone screaming from the hills about the high costs of such a change either, and business never, ever fail to bitch about regulatory costs. So I have to discount your supposed concern.
Did he campaign on it?
That I can recall. Yes he did. He mentioned it on occasion in speeches, so this no surprise to me. Obviously it's not a big vote-getter of an issue, so he didn't walk around in a big red "MAKE CORPORATE REPORTING GREAT AGAIN" hat, but it was a point in the campaign.
We've all seen the "WTF Happened in 1970/1/2?" meme. Now, no one can credibly claim that whatever that stuff means had anything at all to do with the inception of quarterly reporting around the same time. I can claim, however, that somehow, some way, the US economy did, in fact, function pretty well before Nixon's SEC mandated quarterly reporting. So, perhaps Trump's change isn't actually the end of the world and the dawn of the Forth Reich.
If it helps overcome your knee-jerk Airbus vs. Boeing hang-ups, 737 MAX has a known failure mode that will rapidly gas the cockpit with vaporized oil. Equipped with this necessary whataboutery affordance, you should feel safe in at least allowing for the possibility that Airbus is also not flawless in all things.
Cockpits and cabins have been getting filled with various gasses since the inception of pressurization ~80 years ago. To Boeing's credit, the 787 has set a legitimate engineering precedent in aircraft design and eliminated at least some of the major sources of air contamination. Eventually, when Airbus copies it, you'll be able to safely ignore this. So no worries.
"This isn't brain surgery; it's just television." - David Letterman