I suspect this is not for people like us (most of us anyway). This is for younger people - people who grew up with iPads and smart phones. I've never wanted a touchscreen laptop, but I have seen lots of young people who don't use computers much try to touch the screen on a computer. It isn't particularly efficient, but it is what a lot of young people expect... not having it introduces a point of friction.

I agree. I think by now we have arrived as "malice" for what the LLM pushers do. Time to stop them and put them away. But humanity seems to be incapable of dealing with its worst members, and not only in this area.

Good question. I am on board with "somewhat better search", but that does not even justify 1% of the effort currently invested and damage done. The rest seems to be more of a problem than a solution and I do not think that will change.

They all just want to get rich and society (or humanity) be damned. Reminds me of oil executives and weapons peddlers. The scum of the scum, unfortunately having floated to the top as crap has a tendency to do.

You can relay DHCP and TFTP. But you really should not, it usually creates more problems that it solves. And these days, you need a lot of bandwidth for running machines without local disks, even more so for software that assumes a local SSD. No better way to make things painfully slow.

PXE boot is probably just another one of these bad ideas that refuses to die. To be fair, Windows system administration is so badly broken and non-fixable, that PXE boot may make some sense in some scenarios, like machines that are essentially terminals. Why people do not use Linux terminals in those scenarios is beyond me though.

Always the same brand of stupid for the last 50 years. Writing software is hard (because all good engineering is hard) and can only improved by getting the best people and letting them work as unimpeded as possible. Brooks proved that about 50 years ago, but it still gets ignored by small-skill-big-ego "management" routinely that just think they can "manage" people to be better at it. That will never work. It has exactly the opposite effect. As the example here nicely shows, again.

My take is the people going to business school are just generally dumb with big egos. Teaching cannot fix that. In a STEM subject, they would just get washed out. But business schools would be empty if they did that, so they do not and instead do massive damage to society.

It seems likely that the answer to this question is 'yes'; but it seems like a mistake to be distracted by it when we are talking about people who are, busily and intentionally, building 'AI' products against the public.

It's mildly comical when they attempt to emulate humanity; but the important bit isn't the cluelessness; it's the malice.

Simple. People that, without any real evidence, concluded LLMs are great at everything made the decisions. Idiots hiring idiots to implement idiotic things. Just that this time things got more out of hand than usual.

Yes. But there is this breed of economics grads that hate seeing people as people and desperately want to see them as numbers. That does not work and cannot work. See also "A good decision is based on insight, not on numbers" (Plato, a while ago).

The problem is 100% with management that has no clue how things work in the real world. Performance metrics do not work when your people are smart enough to understand the metric. And for jobs like these, everybody is smart enough to understand the metric or they could not do the job at all. Most will also understand the metric is stupid and upper management is comprised of idiots.

You want to use a slop-machine to increase quality? How do you think that can be done?

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. And the LLM hype has a lot of stupidity in it. Yes, LLMs have some uses, but they are nowhere near what gets routinely claimed and what the stupid think they can do.

I suppose - Apple can't copy that feature from everyone else....

The light-up Apple logo has been around for decades.Back when Jobs was around the Apple logo lit up as well because the white plastic Apple logo would let the LCD backlight spill out causing it to light up.

Of course, with OLED this isn't possible anymore so they actually would need to have LEDs behind it to light it up.

Also vi came out that exact same year: Bill Joy wrote it at Berkeley. So I suppose you could argue that your choice is a bit like early rapper culture: east coast vs west coast!

vi is a patch to ed. Remember most terminals were teletypes that output a line at a time, so you used "ed" to edit lines one line at a time. (And likely an inspiration for the brilliant MS-DOS edlin editor). But fancy new video teletypes were becoming a thing, and it was actually possible to display multiple lines of text on the screen at a time. Bill Joy added visual mode to ed to take advantage of this so you can visually display and edit blocks of text rather than a line at a time.

Tools like grep came about from ed as well.

ed-mode is fundamental to vi when doing commands like search and replace.

Want some fun? Set your terminal to TTY mode and try using vi. Depending on how good the emulation of vi is, it might work in line-at-a-time mode or not at all.

If and only if you can touch type

And use QWERTY or QWERTY-like. HJKL cursor navigation doesn't quite work the same on DVORAK or other layouts.