This might be an additional way to quickly iterate on the content of the documentation itself. If I were the one writing, an easy test is passing the documentation to a lay person and asking them if they have what they need to perform X by following the documentation.
Perhaps having a focused LLM generate the steps could help catch some documentation deficiencies.
> If I were the one writing, an easy test is passing the documentation to a lay person and asking them if they have what they need to perform X by following the documentation.
What kind of documentation is this though? Is this how to bake a cake or tie a necktie, or is it how to setup a reverse proxy for the services in your k8s cluster?
If it's something a lay-person could do then I think this is a good strategy (though depending on the size/scope of the project/documentaiton it does seem like a pretty big effort to undertake without compensation), but if it's something highly technical like Traefik, I expect a lay-person to not even understand half the words/vocabulary in the documentation, let alone be able to perform X by reading it and following it.
If we push this into the software development domain, my expectation would be something like "documentation should allow a software developer to do this thing without knowing the underlying tooling".
> how to setup a reverse proxy for the services in your k8s cluster
Going off this specifically. I don't know how to do this. I actually have a k8s cluster on a home server waiting for me to do exactly this. Ideally there would be a doc that would start with ingress selection, and then guide a user through how to get it set up with common use-cases. Or something like that. Like others in this conversation, I've been leveraging LLMs with varying degrees of success to try and navigate this.
It’s been a long-held opinion that tech companies laugh at the out-of-touch Congresspeople at these hearings. Recall Mark Zuckerberg’s incredulity when members of Congress had to ask him how Facebook makes money.
And as if that isn’t enough, tech companies are only loyal to their boards of directors, who are only loyal to quarter-over-quarter growth, and nothing else.
Not saying it’s the case here but a lot of times congress asks these questions as leading questions or to give viewers the full context of follow up questions (or more likely for easy clips).
A hypothetical back and forward might be something like:
“How does Facebook make money?”
“By selling ads.”
“Does Facebook ever target those ads to kids?”
“Yes”
“So is it in facebook’s financial interest for kids to spend as much time as possible on the platform?”
Eh the question posed by the senator was just clumsy: it was something like, "If your users don't pay you, how do actually you make money?"
Clearly the senator was trying to highlight the fact that Facebook can't have its users' best interests at heart, because its very existence depends on pillaging their data and whoring out their eyeballs to the highest bidder. But by playing the fool he made himself actually look like a fool, because he left himself wide open to Zuck's "Senator... we run ads" zinger.
The problem is there are a whole lot of completely clueless people in Congress who ask profoundly stupid questions demonstrating they know nothing, and we expect them to govern.
"Will you ban Finsta?" was not an example of such a question. It was a profoundly stupid question from someone who had the resources to educate themselves before asking it.
The question asked not for me (although...) or you, but for wider audience.
For one immediate example, I do not know what or who Finsta is. The answer to that question, as well as preceding dialogue, would help me to navigate through Facebook's business, and my path would be skewed to favor viewpoint of the interrogator.
This is not discussion of peers, but discussion before a jury.
I prefer people who know quite a bit and come prepared to hearings, as their official job title claims to be, over people just asking questions to fund their next campaign with sound bites or news articles about their impassioned speeches.
No one learns anything new at these hearings. And everyone is posturing.
Or perhaps it doesn't matter whether a particular Member of Congress knows something, but the important part is to have the responsible person in the room and giving testimony, on the record, under oath.
I don't see how it was a stupid question, it was made to make zuckerberg admit that facebook is just an advertising company with a social media side project
Zions Bank (current owners of the building) recently remodeled it very thoroughly, but took the effort to preserve the original brick facade. I'm a current resident of the area, and do love telling the story to visiting friends and family.
I did just peel back the bezel on my Framework here. It looks like those hardware disconnects use some sort of blade that interrupts what I'm assuming to be an optical switch of some sort, one for the mic and one for the camera.
When I started a new job at a NOC, I was pranked with one of those. I didn't know what to make of the odd recurring ~12khz beeps, and figured it was some old device slowly dying. So I pulled out a stopwatch to see if I could suss out the interval on the beeping. I was too focused on timing the beeps to notice my coworkers exchanging glances with each other after asking them, "Does anyone else hear that?"
I found a pattern emerge. It repeated itself every 10 beeps or so, with irregular intervals between those beeps. Armed with that information, I could effectively predict the next beep within 3-5 seconds (intervals ranged between 3-10 minutes, if I recall.) So I started walking around the room, standing in different locations as I stared at my stopwatch. The farther apart the places I stood, the better chance I'd have of triangulating the source with each beep.
I got within 3-5 feet of it in the ~300 square foot room before the coworkers came clean about what they had done. I wasn't even mad, I was having a blast!
As one solo data point, the privately-owned company I work for handles business travel reimbursement based on mileage rather than personal money spent on fuel. The fuel economy of vehicles available to me has factored into at least one instance when planning a business trip.
It would depend on the business policies of course, but can EVSE stations generate digital receipts for costs incurred to charge?
If you plan on running a ZFS file server at home, which enthusiasts prefer because it's one of the only filesystems that supports full file checksumming to prevent bit rot.
Anyway, the ZFS approach is to inherently trust the data that's in RAM over the data on the drive if there's a discrepancy, so ECC RAM is required to maintain the integrity of data on RAM.
All filesystems inherently trust the data that is in RAM. There's nothing any piece of software can reasonably do about memory it can't trust. It's therefore a good idea to run ECC RAM, regardless of which filesystem you run. You can be running your filesystem on Ext4 or the legacy BSD Unix File System, and it would still be a good idea to use ECC.
That ZFS needs ECC moreso than other filesystems is an often repeated misconception. It's just that ZFS (and e.g. Btrfs) is often run on file servers, on which ECC is recommended.
> the ZFS approach is to inherently trust the data that's in RAM over the data on the drive if there's a discrepancy, so ECC RAM is required to maintain the integrity of data on RAM.
This is absurd. Please read up (and understand) this before talking about it again. The benefits of ZFS and the benefits of ECC are orthogonal, though if your fileserver has both, it's a pretty darn robust system with respect to integrity -- assuming that (for example) the disk controllers don't lie about something being synced.
Perhaps having a focused LLM generate the steps could help catch some documentation deficiencies.