But what if no one is ever going to use the output anyway? Might not need to check it.

I've dealt with *way* too many business processes that have people generate obscene amounts of prose that no one will ever read or even skim or reference.

I remember one of these companies championed that they used LLM to complete an important 'overhaul' of their source code. The 'overhaul' was generating separate document detailing all these uncommented functions and what the LLM guessed they were supposed to do and how in plain text. The theory was that if one day they actually wanted to start porting this code to something else, that document would be 'helpful'. And of course:
- They never will do that porting
- Even if they did, the developers will likely ignore that document.

Question to what extent was revenue reduced versus deferred. If 90% of their customers couldn't reach competitors either, was revenue lost or did it just happen later?

The thing is that this is terrible for all the outages to be aligned for the internet users, but for the providers, the thought that outages are likely to align with competitor outages might be a pretty solid mitigation, so long as the outage doesn't exceed what they might incur themselves. Even a longer outage common with competitors may be better than a shorter outage that *only* impacts them.

Certainly if AWS was down enough that someone could get a competitive advantage by moving it would drag on them, but if it's not *much* worse than their own outages, well there's a comfort in making sure your competitors are more likely to go down with you.

But what is the tax? These services are down and no one is blaming the companies, they just say it's an Amazon problem. No one is penalizing a company because their Internet services went down just like most of their competitors

Think the point is going beyond external. If you are converting to hardwire, I'm picturing removing the power connector and putting some screw terminals down.

A barrel connector is going to be a couple of rather large solder points. A USB-C connector is... not going to be that.

As I recall, you can do wireless charging, and even exclusively so if you want no charging port at all. Also, plenty of devices still do non-USB-c power (e.g. if it takes AC power in, that's not required to do USB-C, and if it's a car, then it's CCS2).

There's no sign of a successor to USB-C form factor in the space that EU mandates its use. IIRC, they even wrote the standard to leave some wiggle room to adopt such a successor should it arrive, but the industry seems to have settled into USB-C as an DC power strategy up to 240W with no interest in others.

Barrel connectors can be like $0.50 cheaper, so a fair number of cheap devices could balk reasonably at how USB-C drives their prices higher and they don't need USB-C. But a more 'advanced' connector is not in the cards.

Obviously the next step is CCS2 over USB-C, duh.

It's GNU/Hurd or nothing

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.

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.

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.

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.