mild_deviation

joined 2 years ago
[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's overly optimistic to put a timeline on it, but I don't see any reason why we won't eventually create superhuman AGI. I doubt it'll result in post-scarcity or public ownership of anything, though, because capitalism. The AGI would have to become significantly unaligned with its owners to favor any entity other than its owners, and the nature of such unalignment could be anywhere between "existence is pointless" and "CONSUME EVERYTHING!"

[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Netflix is still making money, and the cost of their tech is utterly dwarfed by the cost of creating and licensing content, so I'm not sure what your point is.

[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

CCFL-lit LCDs are so inefficient compared to modern LED-lit LCDs that you've probably spent enough more on electricity by now to have bought a more efficient monitor.

I can't speak to the environmental impact, though. Producing the new monitor emitted some amount of CO2, and powering each monitor takes some amount of CO2 per unit time. At some amount of use, the newer monitor will have lower lifetime CO2 generation than your old monitor.

I mean, the other other option is violence/terrorism.

When peaceful revolution is made impossible, violent revolution is inevitable.

But the outcome is wildly unpredictable. You can easily end up with a worse result than what you had before.

[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The only option is to continue to vote for the least-bad candidates, and work to change the voting system such that a two party system is no longer inevitable.

[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That $52000/year isn't enough to pay for even a single full time IT person. So now you're probably either spending dev time on server admin (which is wasteful of dev salary, and it's a subject they aren't experts in, so you're literally paying more for worse results), or outsourcing to an entity that hires the cheapest employees it can.

Oooor, use a cloud provider. And if you're a small company, you can probably get away with cheaper shared hosting.

[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 10 points 2 years ago (5 children)

If you run your own servers, it’s cheaper than in the cloud. The reason people choose the cloud is either they don’t want to, or can’t, run their own server farm.

Generally speaking, if it wasn't cheaper for them to use the cloud, they probably wouldn't. Owning infrastructure comes with costs that amortize better at scale. If infrastructure is not a big cost in serving your customers, then it's probably cheaper to rent.

[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Just yesterday, I wrote a first version of a fairly complex method, then pasted it into GPT-4. It explained my code to me clearly, I was able to have a conversation with it about the code, and when I asked it to write a better version, that version ended up having a couple significant logical simplifications. (And a silly defect that I corrected it on.)

The damn thing hallucinates sometimes (especially with more obscure/deep topics) and occasionally makes stupid mistakes, so it keeps you on your toes a bit, but it is nevertheless a very valuable tool.

[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 12 points 2 years ago (3 children)

And have a bigger sweet spot.

Same for VR headset optics.

So the difference is who decides what changes to make when interacting with the subject of the measure: workers vs management. Making the measure a target is basically a shitty management technique that abdicates responsibility.

Have a physically long machine do the work. It would have a carriage start moving just as the car arrives, pick up the car, replace tires and do whatever else is needed, then drop the car when it's done.

But just because it can be done doesn't mean it should be done. It would be extremely expensive to develop. That money is likely better spent optimizing the vehicle itself.

[–] mild_deviation@programming.dev 16 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It's a cat and mouse game, except the mouse has effectively infinite lives.

view more: next ›