Speaking to a relative who was doing cold calls / cold emails as a BDR (business development representative). Manager said they will be able to get rid of 20 BDRs with AI at some point. This seems to be the most vulnerable kind of job.

Yup, that's scary. Also, the actual implementation of "do the right thing" is a big issue. I'm guessing that tip-toeing prompts and keyword scanning are being used now to avoid harm, but if it makes 99% of users uncomfortable the vendor might decide it is necessary to create a secret mental health evaluation score for every user in self defense, and send those users to neutered models with more guard rails, monitoring or even deny service. I can imagine lots of ways that could go wrong.. and also what might happen if they *don't* implement it. I'm guessing GDPR will need to ramp up their game.

Investment is a tricky one.

I'd say that learning how to learn is probably the single-most valuable part of any degree, and anything that has any business calling itself a degree will make this a key aspect. And that, alone, makes a degree a good investment, as most people simply don't know how. They don't know where to look, how to look, how to tell what's useful, how to connect disparate research into something that could be used in a specific application, etc.

The actual specifics tend to be less important, as degree courses are well-behind the cutting edge and are necessarily grossly simplified because it's still really only crude foundational knowledge at this point. Students at undergraduate level simply don't know enough to know the truly interesting stuff.

And this is where it gets tricky. Because an undergraduate 4-year degree is aimed at producing thinkers. Those who want to do just the truly depressingly stupid stuff can get away with the 2 year courses. You do 4 years if you are actually serious about understanding. And, in all honesty, very few companies want entry-level who are competent at the craft, they want people who are fast and mindless. Nobody puts in four years of network theory or (Valhalla forbid) statistics for the purpose of being mindless. Not unless the stats destroyed their brain - which, to be honest, does happen.

Humanities does not make things easier. There would be a LOT of benefit in technical documentation to be written by folk who had some sort of command of the language they were using. Half the time, I'd accept stuff written by people who are merely passing acquaintances of the language. Vague awareness of there being a language would sometimes be an improvement. But that requires that people take a 2x4 to the usual cultural bias that you cannot be good at STEM and arts at the same time. (It's a particularly odd cultural bias, too, given how much Leonardo is held in high esteem and how neoclassical universities are either top or near-top in every country.)

So, yes, I'll agree a lot of degrees are useless for gaining employment and a lot of degrees for actually doing the work, but the overlap between these two is vague at times.

The degree isn't about "getting a high-paid job", it's about knowing what the hell you're doing once you get a job. Although, fair enough, it's quite plausible that not many degrees would meet that standard either.

There is a possibility of a short-circuit causing an engine shutdown. Apparently, there is a known fault whereby a short can result in the FADEC "fail-safing" to engine shutdown, and this is one of the competing theories as the wiring apparently runs near a number of points in the aircraft with water (which is a really odd design choice).

Now, I'm not going to sit here and tell you that (a) the wiring actually runs there (the wiring block diagrams are easy to find, but block diagrams don't show actual wiring paths), (b) that there is anything to indicate that water could reach such wiring in a way that could cause a short, or (c) that it actually did so. I don't have that kind of information.

All I can tell you, at this point, is that aviation experts are saying that a short at such a location would cause an engine shutdown and that Boeing was aware of this risk.

I will leave it to the experts to debate why they're using electrical signalling (it's slower than fibre, heavier than fibre, can corrode, and can short) and whether the FADEC fail-safes are all that safe or just plain stupid. For a start, they get paid to shout at each other, and they actually know what specifics to shout at each other about.

But, if the claims are remotely accurate, then there were a number of well-known flaws in the design and I'm sure Boeing will just love to answer questions on why these weren't addressed. The problem being, of course, is that none of us know which of said claims are indeed remotely accurate, and that makes it easy for air crash investigators to go easy on manufacturers.

It's far from indisputable. Indeed, it's hotly disputed within the aviation industry. That does NOT mean that it was a short-circuit (although that is a theory that is under investigation), it merely means that "indisputable" is not the correct term to use here. You can argue probabilities or reasonableness, but you CANNOT argue "indisputable" when specialists in the field in question say that it is, in fact, disputed.

If you were to argue that the most probable cause was manual, then I think I could accept that. If you were to argue that Occam's Razor required that this be considered H0 and therefore a theory that must be falsified before others are considered, I'd not be quite so comfortable but would accept that you've got to have some sort of rigorous methodology and that's probably the sensible one.

But "indisputable"? No, we are not at that stage yet. We might reach that stage, but we're not there yet.

There's a pretty awesome young singer/artist I've discovered, Sophie Powers, who just reported that some company had totally stolen her likeness, unique fashion, body, everything and I hope she finds a good lawyer. Some evil company like that doesn't even ask they just steal. There are going to be a lot of little Warners, it's pretty scary. Maybe some licensing organizations could get into it? I know JASRAC but when I googled for its U.S. counterpart it sounds like there are a lot of performing rights and mechanical rights orgs.. it gave me ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, AllTrack, MLC, Harry Fox Agency,... too many. One or two big ones might have the clout to go after these people.

I would honestly like to know if anyone here has switched from typical consumer food to home cooked non UPF, and can tell us how their body changed or felt? Personally I think I eat a combination of pretty high quality food with some things that must be UPF even McDonalds once in a blue moon fast food but not much cooking at home. Is there a significant change like weight reduction, improved mood/sleep/energy levels, etc. with home cooking and no UPFs?

Pretty sure I have worse than normal facial recognition, plus thinking about other things than remembering someone's face. But, there actually is a mnemonic trick that works if you remember to use it. It goes something like this:
Latch on to the most obvious facial trait
Make some funny image or word associated with it
Repeat the word and their name many times together
Do that again later or at least until you can write it down.
There is also a similar mnemonic you can use to string together things you need to remember, creating funny or othrwise memorable visual imagery that links to the last thing you visualized. Finally you stuff the last one up your nose. Most people know if they have something stuffed up their nose.
I haven't used either of these tricks in years and maybe never will need to again, but they actually worked.

The last great recession was due to precisely this sort of spending pattern plus a collapse in payment. Banks may be healthy, for now, but they can't keep lending forever with no recover. This is not a good sign.

I'm banking on that

The talk about space being cold, having more light, etc. is pretty much nonsense. More like it has less regulations and bigger budgets. However, I could imagine some kind of low latency compute being needed for applications like:
- Luna: Automated robotic exploration and construction drones wanting 2 second lag, different countries are working on it
- Asteroid mining robots: Onboard compute, or lower latency needed on arrival / when opposite Sun
- Telescope on other side of the sun: Maybe not needed
- Solar system / Oort exploration robots: Maybe needed years from now
- Deep space exploration robots: Maybe needed years from now

Just an armchair guy but it seems like:
- Setting up in-system relays alone should be sufficient for delivering AI+Human based commands when low latency is sufficient, i.e. in transit. And will be required for operation in planetary shadow. We have something at Mars, and for the Far Side of the Moon we are apparently working on Lunar Communications Relay and Navigation Systems (LCRNS) for Artemis.

- Moving compute nearby for lower latency (1 second) will be needed when robots actually touch rock or enter planetary shadows, if we want them to move with any kind of speed. For the Moon, libration points would give 400ms round trip which is probably enough, or in-orbit is better.

- There will be a lot of advancement in processor capability/size and to a much lesser extent space propulsion over the years robots are traveling the deep dark, so it may be better to wait as long as possible so that a miniaturized, low power, high compute package can be delivered on a fast rocket to be there when they need it.

It's more like "spell check my email" I expect. Probably not a lot of people actually pasting spreadsheets into context. I am guessing 100% of non-native and overseas users are using it to help them write English, at least based on one company I know (I think if they have a contract they figure it is safe...).

And as for myself I write a lot of documents and email in a second language. I am very careful not to post anything sensitive but have found Claude to be amazingly good at checking emails or installation guides I write in a different language which I write well (I have been a pro translator in the other direction even), but as a non-native actually still learn better writing style from Claude, in addition to finding typos or better words. It is to the point that translating as a job must be in dire straits. For non-technical users I am guessing once you drink the kool-aid you are going to slide towards pasting anything.

There actually is an engineering side to this called A-POC. But first, all the comments in both threads are kind of bizarre. Issey Miyake (who is not alive) is a famous Japanese high-end fashion designer famous for pleated designs, dance costumes, impractical appearing dramatic but unique products.

Personally I have no interest in it but to clarify just google "Miyake piece of cloth" or read the Design Boom article here:
https://www.designboom.com/des...

Or as google summarizes, "Piece of fabric" refers to A-POC (A Piece of Cloth), a revolutionary Issey Miyake project that uses computer-driven machines to create garments from a single piece of fabric. Miyake makes all kinds of wardrobe from this process. Designboom has covered various projects under this concept, such as a collaboration with Apple on a 3D-knitted "iPhone pocket" and an exhibition with Nature Architects exploring heat-reactive fabrics. A-POC was launched in 1998. It was developed by Issey Miyake and Dai Fujiwara with the goal of streamlining production. An industrial knitting or weaving machine is fed a single thread and programmed to produce a single, continuous tube of fabric. Seams are pre-woven into the fabric, and the customer can cut along these lines to create individual garments like dresses, shirts, and socks. This process minimizes fabric waste and allows for mass production of varied clothing items from a single, seamless piece of cloth. The concept continues with the brand A-POC ABLE ISSEY MIYAKE, which explores the technology's potential beyond clothing. For example, a 2025 collaboration with Apple, reported by Designboom, resulted in the "iPhone Pocket," a 3D-knitted wearable accessory. Another project collaborated with Nature Architects to develop "Steam Stretch" fabric that contracts when exposed to heat. Designboom has also covered exhibitions related to the A-POC concept, such as "Weaving Becomes an Act of Illumination" which explored creating fabrics with tonal gradients by varying weave density, and the "A-POC ABLE ISSEY MIYAKE & atelier oï" installation that showed a single piece of cloth can be used for both clothing and lighting.

So calling the product a "sock" is pretty much the most pejorative, stupid take on this and reflects exceedingly badly on anyone who repeats it.. unless that's what the Miyake or Apple people are calling it, kind of doubt that, but at least they know that it is a 3D automated tubular knitting computer output and not a fucking athletic sock. Anyway google and there are a lot of articles about it.

Looking at the PR, the picture of the iPhone peeking out from a beige carrier actually suggests it is quite a luxurious piece and the only photo in which it looks good. It suggests that the woven fabric likely delivers a very satisfying soft tactile sensation, which might outweigh all other considerations for many people once they touch it. The post shows the carrier as being able to knot itself around the strap of a handbag (Miyake's famous Baobab design using articulated triangles.. which is so popular now it is a little cringey). It is being launched at just Apple's premier addresses, probably every Baobab owner would be buying a MacBook so I get that.

Anyway, this is just a fashion accessory for people rich enough to be able to afford a mid to high range MacBook (already several thousand dollars). The colors are intended to be chosen apparently depending on whether your Baobab bag is black or white themed. Personally I don't really think most colors match, or even go well with that bag, and I don't have any desire for the carrier itself. But I expect a lot more people would buy it than the 24K solid gold Apple Watches that I thought were finished, but now I found something like on leronza.com which has full gold bracelets attached to them.. sheesh. More than I even wanted to know.

Anyway this is the only post on two threads that actually knows what this thing and A-POC are and is not belittling people for spending $200 when they probably already have spent $2000 to $8000 on a MacBook. Though when I get done buying my new tricked out MBP with 128MB RAM for gpt-oss-120B I will not be having money left over for *any* luxuries for a loooong time.