My employer announced that AI costs will be billed back to departments. Token use (almost entirely among developers) was cut in half without affecting productivity, and perhaps even enhancing productivity because they had to think a bit about the best use of what they had instead of trying random things.
I actually think that you could craft good arguments for allowing trojans. It's the stuff in temporary resonance orbits that I was really thinking of. There are a lot of orbits that are only semi-stable, say stable for a century or two, but not for millennia.
I've only been paying attention since 1990 but every single time a feature they don't offer "is stupid" until they offer it.
Even when I liked the company this Cluster B behavior always bothered me.
If there's an example of "that's a really nice feature our competitor has but we don't offer it yet" I haven't seen it.
The closest I can think of was offering WebObjects for Solaris. Not sure if that ever shipped or we just had a beta. I bailed from that Healthcare IT team when the CIO pulled funding for two-phase commit among disparate patient medication systems with the rationale "even if medication errors kill someone it'll be cheaper to settle the lawsuits than pay for the license." Enough people left that they outsourced and everybody still hates that replacement system.
I learned too late that MBA's don't care about quality.
Also, is there a point, when any app uploaded to one of these app stores would have to basically comply with the same terms and conditions as apps on the Google Play Store, from the looks of it?
Google is trying to claw back some of their precious per-sale revenue loss by charging that $10K, and increasing the barrier to entry to the point where only serious businesses will attempt it. It's obvious that having third party app stores provides no benefit for Google, so they are doing everything they legally can to stem their losses. With monopoly app stores, Google and Apple basically have a license to print money. The incentives are not great for consumer freedom.
> everything you do has fucked the consumers
Say more
Let them do their thing.
I remember in High School the Camaro guys couldn't stop talking about how their Camaros were better than Mustangs but the Mustang guys never felt the need to denigrate the Camaros.
It's a matter of nature.
unrelated: Tailscale is so fooked today:
https://www.bleepingcomputer.c...
Some people here may need to panic right about now.
Don't be hypnotized by the names. What is most significant (after the orbit) is the mass. And that's a pretty smooth gradation (at least on a logarithmic scale).
If you want "planet" to mean "stuff in orbit around the sun", you end up with most planets weighing micrograms...or possibly less.
N.B.: By the strict definition of "planet" used by the IAU, even Jupiter wouldn't really qualify, because it hasn't cleared it's orbit. There's a lot of small stuff and, of course, the trojans.
Yeah, but...
The guess at the size is based on the guess of the albedo. If it's covered with something dark, it a LOT larger. (I'm presuming they're guessing it's covered with methane ice.)
Plausible. Most communicable diseases are addressable by social habits...if you can get people to do them.
I disagree. I think it probably CAN get much faster, but I'm not sure how much cheaper it can get.
The approach I think could succeed is the "bio-chip", with lots of cells and feed lines so different wells in the chip would host different combinations of bacteriophage and sample. This would need to be screened frequently, probably by an AI, that would pick out the most successful set. I think this could, in principle, usually be done within a couple of days in a mostly automated way. But that's a pretty complex setup, and I doubt that it could be done really cheaply.
It's not even that. Most of the drug-resistant bacteria existed before antibiotics came out of the lab. But they weren't a very successful part of the population. Antibiotics killed off their competition, and now they're successful. Most methods of resisting antibiotics have an energy cost, so bacteria that don't use them are more successful if the antibiotics aren't around. Unfortunately, it's not usually a very high cost, so stopping the use of an antibiotic doesn't reset the population, at least not quickly.
But, yeah, bacteria mutate really rapidly to fill a new niche, so you probably literally CAN'T have an antibiotic both in wide use and remaining effective.
Actually, getting the CO2 out of the atmosphere is possible, but *quite* expensive. Thermodynamics + entropy mean it will take more energy to get the CO2 re-concentrated than it released in being created.
Not fair. There are applications for which nuclear appears to be the best solution.
But, yeah, solar and wind scale a lot faster and more cheaply, even when you include the needed storage.
The right way to do this is to hire a group of developers and have test volunteers report workflow problems - then FIX them - then iterate. That's the point of choosing an open source solution.
Eventually there would be no problems remaining.
But so many possible scenarios exist that it's impossible to guess what happened here.
PS _NSA_KEY
There are apparently other unpatched vulnerabilities that are known but 'too busy':
It sounds like this fix got done because it was 'accidentally' posted as a public PR.
If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong. -- Norm Schryer
