Yeah, one of the things I like about Claude (and Gemini 3 as opposed to 2.5) is that they really clamped down on the use of "Oh, now I've got it! This is absolutely the FINAL fix to the problem, we've totally solved it now! Here, let me write out FIX_FINAL_SOLVED.md" with some half-arse solution. And yep, the answer to going in circles is usually either "nuke the chat" or "switch models".
Putting bean-counters as heads of tech companies almost always fails. It Killed Yahoo, the titan of the early web.
AI seems to be feeding the bloat habit instead of trimming it. It's becoming an auto-bloater.
Very few in the industry are interested in parsimony. Devs would rather collect buzzwords for their resume rather than try to trim out layers and eye-candy toys. It's kind of like letting surgeons also be your general doctor, they'd recommend surgery more often than you really need it.
The principles of typical biz/admin CRUD haven't really changed much since client/server came on the scene in the early 90's. Yet the layers and verbosity seem to keep growing. An ever smaller portion of time is spent on domain issues and ever more on the tech layers and parts to support the domain. Something is wrong but nobody is motivated to do anything about it because bloat is job security.
YAGNI and KISS are still important, but is dismissed because it reduces one's resume buzzword count. The obsession with scaling for normal apps is an example of such insanity: there's only like a 1 in 50k chance your app or company will ever become FANG-sized, yet too many devs want to use a "webscale" stack. You're almost as likely to get struck by lightning while coding it. They patients are running the asylum.
Humans, you are doing CRUD wrong!
Only micro-movements are necessary to avoid most space junk*, using tiny "cold" thrusters which are not enough to serve as a rapid-response spy-probe. High-end spy probes probably have lots of fuel and big nozzles.
Don's spy-probe: "Hey Xi, look, my nozzle's bigger than yours!"
* If they have short notice to swerve, then small engines are probably not good enough, but that situation is probably not (yet) common enough to justify carrying large thruster systems.
...hide his farts.
There's like a dozen different ink cartridge gimmicks HP uses to fuck over consumers. In my case one had to press a "confirm" prompt every time one printed if the color cartridge was past an alleged expiration date even if I was only printing in black-and-white.
HP used to have a good reputation, then seemed to turn evil on a dime. Was there a board meeting where they had a "let's be evil" vote and it passed?
With our luck a bubble burst will also put a manufacturer out of business, meaning less choice and higher prices in the end. It would allow oligopolies to get oligopolier. The rich have the means to wait out slumps for advantage.
...Hydrazine nozzles are probably the simplest technique, being it doesn't need ignition, but are not as powerful as ignition-based path adjustment mini-rockets.
Maybe the speed and degree with which military satellites maneuver has increased of late? They probably can't tells us without having to kill us. You ask first!
Yeah, when thinking of the typical air fryer market, think "working mom with kids who wants to serve something nicer than a microwave dinner, but doesn't have the time for much prep or waiting". You can get those mailard reactions that microwaving doesn't really get you, nice crisping and browning of the surface that you normally get from an oven, without having to wait for an oven to preheat. I don't think anyone disputes that an oven will do a better job, but the air fryer does a better job than a microwave, which is what it's really competing against. They're also marketed as easy-clean, which again is a nod to their target audience.
How costs build up is really staggering. I'm getting into the business of importing 3d filament. In Iceland, it currently sells for like $35/kg minimum. The actual value of the plastic is like $1. The factory's total cost, all costs included, is like $1,50. If it's not name brand, e.g. they're not dumping money on marketing, they sell it for $3 for the cheapest stuff. Sea freight adds another dollar or two. Taxes here add 24%. But you're still at like $5/kg. The rest is all middlemen, warehousing, air freight for secondary legs from intermediary hubs, and all the markup and taxes on those things.
With me importing direct from the factory, sea freight only, I can get rid of most of those costs. Warehousing is the biggest unavoidable cost. If I want to maintain an average inventory of like 700kg, it adds something like $5/kg to the cost. Scanning in goods and dispatching user orders (not counting shipping) together adds like $2,50. And then add 24% tax (minus the taxes on the imported goods). There's still good margin, but it's amazing how quickly costs inflate.
Your "junk" is someone else's "must-have".
Your "must-have" is someone else's "junk".
end up inadvertently copying the bursting also.
I suspect these X-clone adventures are subsidized in multiple ways just as AI, batteries, and solar was.
I mean, from a horticultural perspective, there is some potential to gain more of other nutrients, in that if you have more energy, you can develop a larger root system, or generally more effectively, better feed mycorrhizal associations (fungal hyphae are much finer than root hairs, so can get into smaller cracks, and fungi can "acid mine" nutrients out of mineral grains - as an example, here's a microscopic image showing what they did to a garnet)
That said, yeah, in general if you can provide more energy, you expect the storage of "calories" to grow much faster than the acquisition of other minerals. Also, it's important to note that while more CO2 is generally good for most plants, more heat, or greater periods of drought (land dries out faster, monsoon belts spread) and flooding (atmosphere holds more moisture, monsoon belts spread) are not. In regards to heat as well, there's a lot of details. First off, though we commonly don't think about it, heat management in plants is critical. Their proteins are designed for function within an optimal temperature range, and to maintain it, they have to cool themselves down with transpiration, creating more water stress. Also it's worth noting that C3 plants (most plants) fundamentally don't tolerate heat as well as C4 or CAM plants (there's work to engineer C4 into some common agricultural crops... it's frankly amazing to me that they're getting some success, as it's not a trivial change).
BTW, the reason that plants grow better with more CO2 isn't what most people might think. The TL/DR is that the protein that sequesters CO2 so that (using ATP and NADPH from photosynthesis) - RuBisCo (the most abundant protein on Earth, something that has been evolving for billions of years) frankly sucks at its job. Something like 20-25% of the time (at normal CO2 levels), instead of binding with CO2, it binds with O2 instead ("photorespiration"), which means not only does it not sequester a carbon, but the plant has to *give up a carbon* to regenerate the RuBisCo. This is disastrous in terms of energy efficiency. And as a side effect, you also have to keep the stomata open more, which means more water loss. But as you increase the CO2 levels, the ratio between binding CO2 and binding O2 improves, and photorespiration waste drops. C4 plants "fix" this problem by instead of having RuBisCo directly bind CO2, they first bind CO2 into malate (with high selectivity), then the malate transports into bundle sheath cells, the CO2 is re-released, and THEN - in a high-CO2 environment - RuBisCo takes it up. This reduces photorespiration, but also introduces some more wasteful chemical conversions. (CAM plants to even further by storing malate inside vacuules - at the cost of even more energy - so that they can store it up during the night, and then use it during the day, which - although even more wasteful - lets them keep their stomata closed during the day to conserve water)
(BTW, there are some microbes that have developed a more efficient RuBisCo, but it's proving challenging to engineer it into higher plants)
Maybe we'll finally see a return to real film. I'll dig up my ole, trusty 500C/M from the basement just in case.
I dunno about you, but I still scan my film negatives out of my Hasselbland 500 CM.....so even with shooting on film, it ends up on the computer in the end....
Wouldn't continuing pay and residuals help make the argument here?
"A mind is a terrible thing to have leaking out your ears." -- The League of Sadistic Telepaths
