Enron's stock was pretty good, too.

Stock price is not a measure of success.

Literally everything about AI coding is hacked together. Top to bottom, from every player.

Why can't I use my bank's app, which I presumably already trust, to tap-to-pay? Why should there be a third party involved at all?

Allow me to offer a minor reframing: printing presses aren't about duplicating writing. The printing press exists to mass produce text regardless of how or where the content of the text was produced.

LLMs likewise are text production machines. They don't produce writing, they produce text. Text without writing is what we call slop in the modern parlance.

LLMs are literally throwing random dice into a printing press and making a thousand copies that you then try to huck on the street as if it were a real newspaper.

I'm confused, how can I see it, for example?

Looks to me that the ban was reversed at some point. The GP's comments are quite reachable.

Enable showdead and scroll through their history

They have a lot of dead comments, and their recent comments are all non-dead.

Either people are vouching for those again and again, or the ban was lifted at some point. I don't really know how this works here, but the first option seems unlikely to me.

Strangely, I'm still seeing the comment. How does that work?

A user with enough reputation and who has enabled the option to view censored comments can vouch for a censored comment, restoring it.

I wonder how that algorithm works. At the risk of discussing a bit of a taboo topic (are there rules against this? there might be...), I've never vouched for a comment and had it come alive. I have many times been the final nail in a comment where my flag caused it to die, but I have never seen the opposite with vouch.

Interesting. Every time I've ever vouched a comment, it came alive. (Though the last one I vouched ended up dead again after enough people flagged it, oops. I hope that doesn't mean I lost my power. In my defense, it was flagged to death based on being AI [apparently], which I didn't pick up the signal on, nothing super terrible / controversial.)

You are probably shadowbanned from flagging and vouching, which is separate from a commenting and posting shadowban. A shadowbanned comment only requires one vouch to come alive. A comment that is dead because of excessive flags or moderator action may require more.

We are, quite notably, in a huge hiring crisis where vast numbers of programmers and researchers can't even get interviews. It really is not that simple

That's an incredibly impractical and expensive place to put it. Frankly, I don't believe you purely because it'd be $200 cheaper for the manufacturer to put the antennas in the shark fin on the roof with all the other antennas

No, it's wrong (and illegal) to hold ransom someone else's stolen property.

The phone belonged to Apple. The phone was stolen (illegal). The stolen phone was then knowingly purchased as stolen property (illegal), and then the reporter demanded payment for the stolen property (once more, illegal).

N=1, but I had a drive show catastrophic SMART failures once. I figured I'd take the opportunity to tinker with the exposed serial port on the drive's PCB and wiped the SMART values.

Funny thing was, I didn't actually observe any data loss. I stressed the drive for several days, no errors. It went back in my daily driver for the next 5 years with no failure. It's been 15 years since that happened and the drive still hasn't failed.

I don't trust SMART anymore.

I've known a fair few drives with uncorrectable sectors or adaptor warnings that continue to work but a lot more that have degraded or just outright failed.

It's also completely wrong. Doc Brown's time machine did not require 1.21 gigawatts.

Very explicitly, it's 1.21 jigawatts. Completely different unit. What's a jigawatt? It's a movie, neither jigawatts nor flux capacitors are real things.

It could be gigawatts, if Doc Brown also pronounces "GIF" as "jif".

And in the French dubbed version, it's 2.21 gigowatt

Buy a $300 motherboard now in case you need future features, or buy a $100 motherboard now that does everything you currently need and then buy a second or even third $100 motherboard if you ever actually need those future improvements.

Then you get a new board designed for the new features instead of something several years old and you come out $100 on top.

Futureproofing is nonsense. PCs just don't work that way, and haven't for decades.

The only 2 parts that even make sence to "future proof" are power supply and case.

> Buy a $300 motherboard now in case you need future features, or buy a $100 motherboard now that does everything you currently need and then buy a second or even third $100 motherboard if you ever actually need those future improvements.

Right, but the problem is that by now your $100 new motherboard requires a new CPU and new RAM. Which is very much not $100.

In the past we got away with PCI cards to add features without changing the motherboard, but we still ended up changing everything every 2 years anyway…