It's crazy reading these comments here. We are really living in some dystopian future to some degree. Let's unite and fight. Act local, do what you can and don't lose hope. The Internet is broken. Not sure if it's just brainwashed people commenting here or bots or some societies just embrace destroying everything for profit and capitalism.
We know what to do. We don't need to wait for some magic AI that's basically learned from books written by humans to tell us what to do. It's all about power structures, capitalism and money.
Everyone in the oil business knew in the 80ies.
We could probably even figure out how to keep our standard of living but consumerism needs to stop but then capitalism breaks down.
1. No we can't - at least not enough that it matters and it's energy intensive. There is no technical solution here but the powers that be want you to believe that to continue generating profits.
2. That's not how it works. It's more like a greenhouse and climate gases absorb more energy. Also look up after how many meters a steel cable ruptures under it's own weight. It's not exactly easy. Thermonuclear war might help.
1. To state there is no technical solution is assuming you have all of the knowledge there ever will be in the world to make that assessment. A more proper way to state that is that you don’t know a technical solution, and there may or may not be one. There’s no reason not to do everything we can and research all options.
2. Having the ability to control the amount of sunlight hitting the Earth would help prevent overwarming, which is one possible outcome, and neither thermonuclear war nor any culling of humanity would be a solution, as in fact we’re responsible for this, so we must fix it. You’re basically suggesting killing all the life that could help.
1. You can't bend physics and the known solutions don't work out in scale. It's magical thinking to continue doing what we are doing.
2. We can already fix this but for this we need to radically change the power structures that are in place and figure out a way to peacefully solve the problem. Reducing emissions should be the biggest priority everywhere.
There might theoretically be a technological solution, but the search for it is a distraction to prevent working structural societal changes from being made.
This (ragebaity/ai?) post kind of mixes things up. Kubernetes is fine I think but almost everything around it and the whole consulting business is the problem. You can build a single binary, use a single layer oci container and run it with a single config map with memory quota on 30 machines just fine.
Take a look at the early borg papers what problem does it solves. Helm is just insane but you can use jsonnet that is modelled after Google's internal system.
Only use the minimal subset and have an application that is actually build to work fine in that subset.
The granularity of the web stack is ruinous. Of course the opposite also has issues - e.g. iOS, a monolithic stack where there's one standard, but often good tool for every common requirement. But I'd happily take even a semi-competent benevolent dictator over the insane multiplication of options for every single microscopic piece of the stack, each with its own obscure proper noun, phrase, or acronym.
It's not personal but I can't help myself to think that's such a sad post here. Reducing learning a different culture through language by plugging in an earbud. Is the battery is gone or your phone is stolen you realize you can't automate anything and that you've learned nothing. It's not about the tech if it works it's amazing it's like babelfish but it's so shallow to assume everything has some direct and simple "value" that can be replaced by some machine or even better some paid service. It's so common here. Is this an US thing?
I think it'll greatly increase cultural learning, by increasing the opportunity to interact with people. I've traveled to a lot of countries, and never learned more than a handful of words in each, primarily related to basic service interactions. I enjoyed talking to locals when they spoke English. I couldn't interact in any meaningful way with the vast majority of people, though.
Learning languages is great. If you can become fluent in two that's impressive. Even simple conversational ability in a few languages is impressive. But it's a big world.
He's not, because those locals will stop being able to speak English in a few generations. Either you'll have battery and signal or you'll point at things and make monkey noises.
What do we care what happens in a few generations? We'll all be dead, and the people alive will probably have universal translators implanted in their brains at birth. We absolutely won't need a "signal" to translate on a device anymore (that'll happen in just a few years, forget about generations), and there won't be anyplace on the entire planet that doesn't have network connectivity (that will also happen in just a few years; it's already reality with Starlink cellular).
I think you’re reading a sense of cultural reductionism in my comment that I didn’t intend.
There’s more to learning a culture than the language. And having a real-time translator makes it possible to enjoy a huge range of cultures much more directly than before. The fact is, I’m not going to learn Chinese and Swahili and Japanese. So my choices are to go through a human translator or nothing if I want to talk to those people.
How is it sad that a technology is going to allow me to directly talk to a huge number of people that I never could have before?
It's a much older theme, going all the way back to the Biblical legend of the Tower of Babel (hence the name of the fish.) Like most of that material, the Babel myth was probably stolen from the Babylonians or even older cultures.
The powers that be -- whether gods or governors -- tend to feel threatened when people can communicate freely with each other. Don't join their side.
I think you misunderstood my post. It's wonderful technology and a great aid. I just wanted to say there is so much more to learning a foreign language (and culture) than machine translation - even if almost perfect. At least that was my take away from learning Czech as a German. Lot's of subtle details.
No, I was making a larger point: there shouldn't be any such thing as a "foreign language." We're all members of the same species. (Yes, even Americans.) Technology like this is what will realize that ideal.
If cultures around the world had all grown up alongside each other, speaking the same language, and someone came along and said, "That's no good, every nation and every ethnic group should speak a different language," we wouldn't rush to embrace that point of view, would we? Who would benefit from such a policy? Certainly not you and me.
Ah I see. I disagree because it's impossible. Even the next village or town has a different language even if it's subtle. I'm more for embracing the differences.
On the other hand we are probably almost there - it's English and social media is the global teacher.
What's the point of diversity if people can't communicate with each other, or if only educated elites within each subculture can do so? Diversity should bring different people together, not divide them artificially.
The irony here, is that diversity is actually extremely aligned with conservative values: freedom of expression and the ability to do what one wants (without regard to others).
Freedom of diversity allows for the flourishing of unique ideas and perspectives, which in turn, has many benefits, in terms of the creation of new value in unexpected ways. Diversity, in a sense, can be a synonym for independence and freedom.
I concur. Doing this for almost all my technical equipment and mobile phones and never had a problem. For important/expensive things you can buy on refurbished stores that offer a 1-year warranty in EU.
It's not only public facing websites - Azure is also pretty inconsistent and lately any offer to preview a new UI was a downgrade and I happily reverted back - it's like they have a mandatory font and whitespace randomizer for any product. Also while far from a power user I've hit glitches that caused support tickets and are avoidable with clearer UX. Copilot in Azure - if it works at all - has been pretty useless.
You are not alone. Joined a company with a rails codebase and I really came to hate convention over configuration if you are not familiar with the convention. I've found Ruby on Roda and dry-rb much more understandable. I guess it's really a matter of taste. I've did C++ and Java before and while I appreciate Ruby rails is too much magic for me. I also hate to run into errors in runtime that a typed language would have catched.
Thanks! The information here is why I think it's extremely plausible that staffing shortages were disastrous here. But it also doesn't make the direct link. I think it's probably just too soon to know whether all the warnings went out as they should.
But another problem with our current government is that I'm skeptical any investigation to answer those questions will ever happen.
I'm in my 40ies and in Germany and basically from my friends and surroundings I've realized the only people that have children are academics / people with established careers where both partners earn very well and have stable jobs or people on welfare where at least all necessities are covered. What's missing is people in-between, people with limited contracts, people without money in the family and people working a job that hardly pays more than what you would get with welfare.
If you look at birth rates in eastern europe after the fall of the soviet union and the establishment of neoliberal economics everwhere and the development of eastern europe economies as workbenches for western corporations with low wages the birth rates fell and are only slowly recovering now.
Before that - while circumstances where surely not better in a lot of ways - essentials like housing, childcare (kindergarden and so on) where provided and you could be assured to be fine no matter what is going on in your job.
Now you are only fine if you either on welfare and have nothing to loose anyway or earn so much that you can afford everything and risk having children. If you are in between (like most of the population around 20-40 here) it's perceived as a risky gamble.
Yeah, I do wonder if a survey question getting at "how concerned am I about the risk that I won't be able to find good work in 15 years" would be pretty well correlated with fertility rate decline. Most things I see look at current economic conditions, but I think you're right that it's the perception of future earning potential, a decade or two out, that is most stressful to parents of young children.
