• 0 Posts
  • 104 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 28th, 2023

help-circle






  • LLMs likely have no good role to play in education and I wouldn’t be surprised if banning them outright in what may become a harshly fought battle isn’t too far away.

    While I agree that LLMs have no place in education, you’re not going to be able to do more than just ban them in class unfortunately. Students will be able to use them at home, and the alleged “LLM detection” applications are no better than throwing a dart at the wall. You may catch a couple students, but you’re going to falsely accuse many more. The only surefire way to catch them is them being stupid and not bothering to edit what they turn in.



  • That’s actually not that big of a deal!

    Since these craft would be small, they wouldn’t have the power to transmit back to Earth anyway. So with something like this, you would actually want a string of these kind of crafts that you would propel along the same vector so that they could send the data back using each following craft as the next point in the network back to Earth. So each one can take additional pictures to get a resolvable image at the end!

    Now, getting them on the same vector is the hard part, since we’re constantly moving through space and won’t have the same launch conditions on subsequent launches, but this is all theoretical at this point anyway.


  • No, because the solar wind drops off around 100 AU, and the power of the solar wind is going to reduce the farther out you are. These kinds of craft would get much more acceleration from a laser array that can put much more concentrated energy into the sail. But just like the solar wind, it will lose power the farther away from the array it is, along with any kind of intermediary debris attenuating the beam or unfavorable angles between the array and the craft.

    So you can get these to an appreciable fraction of the speed of light, but I don’t think we’d be able to get anywhere close to c with this kind of a setup.

    Edit: I was wrong about the solar wind above, it’s only like .5% as powerful as the photons emitted by the sun, and that energy drops off at only 1.5 AU, so they’ll get much less energy than I thought without an external power source like a laser array.




  • These are loans. And making them attractive with cashbacks and rewards is done to trap unresponsible spenders

    I am aware, which is why I specifically said

    This is bad advice for anyone with good credit and spending habits.

    For people who aren’t irresponsible spenders, it’s a bad financial decision not to take the short term bank loan. Sure, I don’t need to spend the banks money because I have enough in my checking account to cover it. But by not doing so, I lose money on any transactions that don’t charge me a fee to run my card.

    If you’re not responsible enough to use a credit card and not destroy your finances, absolutely do not use them. But for those of us who are, it’s a dumb idea to eschew it just because you have the money on hand. Like I said, I haven’t paid interest in a decade and have made thousands from my normal spending habits.

    If I followed your advice, I would be objectively worse off, because I’d be losing money from my rewards for no benefit whatsoever. And I can guarantee I’d be materially worse off, since my credit card is the reason my credit is as good as it is, and that bullshit has a pervasive and perverse effect on your life. It’s not only loans that are impacted, but insurance, housing and employment can be as well. So maybe I should have left good credit off, since responsible spending will build your credit up even if it is bad currently.

    TL;DR - responsible credit card use is a good thing, and foregoing it just because you have money on hand is a bad financial decision. Pay that shit off immediately and there’s no material downside and you still get all the benefits.





  • It’s not really criticism, it’s competitors claiming they will never fuck up.

    Not in all cases [podcast warning], sometimes it’s just them pointing out they’re doing silly things like how they test every update and don’t let it out the door with <98% positive returns or having actual deployment rings instead of of yeeting an update to millions systems in less than an hour.

    It’s reasonable to criticize CrowdStrike. They fucked up huge. The incident was a fuckup, and creating an environment where one incident could cause total widespread failure was a systemic fuckup. And it’s not even their first fuckup, just the most impactful and public.

    Clownstrike deserves every bit of shit they’re getting, and it amazes me that people are buying the bullshit they’re selling. They had no real testing or quality control in place, because if that update had touched test windows boxes it would have tipped them over and they’d have actually known about it ahead of time. Fucking up is fine, we all do it. But when your core practices are that slap dash, bitching about criticism just brings more attention to how badly your processes are designed.

    But also Microsoft fucked up.

    How did Microsoft fuck up? Giving a security vender kernel access? Like they’re obligated to from previous lawsuits?

    And the clients, those who put all of their trust into Microsoft and CrowdStrike without regard to testing, backups, or redundancy, they fucked up, too

    Customers can’t test clownstrike updates ahead of time or in a nonprod environment, because clownstrike knows best lol.

    Redundancy is not relevant here because what company is going to use different IDR products for primary and secondary tech stacks?

    Backups are also not relevant (mostly) because it’s quicker to remediate the problem than restore from backup (unless you had super regular DR snaps and enough resolution to roll back from before the problem.

    IMO, clownstrike is the issue, and customers have only the slightest blame for using clownstrike and for not spending extra money on a second IDR on redundant stacks.