I'm going to go the other way: if 7 days is not enough then you are not thinking hard enough about how you want to solve the problem that you have. Because if you have to do so much, type so much code, organize so many things, just to get your problem resolved, and it cannot be split up or delegated, then you are doing it wrong.
I do not know how it is for other people but I cannot be in a creative and problem-solving mood 8 hours a day. Heck: I have the best days were I actually type very little but still get to _finally_ understand and solve whatever I'm looking into.
I work in manufacturing; my boss could use this lesson real bad. Dude works every single day, 14-16 hours a day. Always going on about how he doesn't have time for this or that, too much going on. Always forgetting stuff because he's got 472 things on his mind. Probably has trouble finding any of those 472 things in his Excel-based wall of notes that gets called "task management". Constant miscommunication within the company. Total lack of systematization. He openly admits he he can't take a vacation because the company can't run without him there constantly.
Absolutely refuses to consider revising the processes he's used for 20 years. Where have I worked? What's some young buck gonna come in there and teach him? Meh, not my problem. I systematized my one little area and the rest can go to heck.
I'm not a professional analyst but the numbers look weird to me. Prediction was to sell 507,000 in Q4, they delivered 497,570, but only made 459,445. That means that they had almost 35.000 cars "laying around" from Q3 that they delivered in Q4. That seems a bit weird to me. But maybe someone that monitors the big 3 automakers in the USA can comment on how many cars waiting in the pipeline is a normal amount.
Also the total 2024 production shows something very interesting: Tesla is a one-trick pony. They sold 1,77 million cars, of which 1,70 million were model 3/Y. So the Model S, X, and cybertruck only make up 85,000 cars. That is not healthy for the long term. Because the Model 3 and Y compete in the middle class price wise, so nobody buys expensive Tesla's. And nobody can buy a cheap Tesla because there is no 25k Toyota Corolla equivalent.
It will be interesting to see in the next years if Tesla can make a dent in other price segments.
As someone who bought Microsoft Flight simulator via Steam I concur. I swear that Flight Simulator updates use at least 3 layers of redirection between starting via Steam, getting updates for the main program, and then getting updates for the scenery files,and then getting another set of updates while already running the main Flight Sim program. Absolutely bizar.
I started with a Psion 3 and later a Psion 5MX and now 30 years later I still remember how good the user experience was. The agenda, de contact database, the way you could make your own database with data that you wanted to lookup while on the move, it all just worked. At some point in time I even had a mapping tool, I think the precursor to what is now TomTom.
Personally I think that today an only iphone/macbook with just the default software (mail/contacts/calendar/etc) comes somewhat close to the same user experience. A Windows machine, while having a million different programs available at your fingertips, does not feel as a cohesive user experience.
That would have been Autoroute. Written in the UK, the software house, Nextbase, was bought by Microsoft in 1993/94 and the Psion release was called "Microsoft Automap" - the only Microsoft release for that platform!
And yet... I worked for a small software company (STNC Ltd.) that was acquired by Microsoft in '99. One of our customers was Psion, and then Symbian, we definitely shipped releases to them after the acquisition, so there was (or could be) Microsoft software on the Psion
On a different not, my understanding was that Psion had paid Cygnus to work on Arm support for gcc. So essentially Psion was responsible for gcc having arm support.
The tool chain was bizarre, writing c++ in the Microsoft Visual C++ ide, and building with gcc. Which was crazy in the 90s
Dyson spheres are a nice way to look at what humans are capable of in the future. That is why they probably capture the imagination.
I actually do not see them as much more than beefed up solar panels. 50 Years ago a solar panel was something that most people saw on a novelty pocket calculator. 30 years ago people started thinking about solar panels to actually power a house off-grid. 20 years ago people started things about solar farms that could give useful power to the grid. And now solar panels are ubiquitous and just about anyone can put them on a roof of a house and the world makes them in such large numbers that it is hard to imagine the number of panels made per second.
Maybe in 20 years time we will find out that a solar panel in space is much better because the sunlight does not have to travel through the atmosphere. So why not put large panels in space. Then in 40 years time we understand that we need to position them closely around the sun to get the maximum power output. Of-course the power cord is a bit long to earth so you then also put your factories on those panels. Which is no problem because launching large reusable rockets in space is a problem that is being solved right now. And breaking factories down in container sized chunks to transport them was already invented 60 years ago with containers and container ships.
> Maybe in 20 years time we will find out that a solar panel in space is much better because the sunlight does not have to travel through the atmosphere
It is basically guaranteed that microwave or laser beam from there is going to have a dual use purpose. As a source of energy and as a directed energy weapon. And it is a quite high chance that it will get banned by power which did not build it. Be it China, Russia, EU or USA.
I'm actually shocked that a company that has spent 25 years on finetuning search results for any random question people ask in the searchbox does not have a good, clean, dataset to train an LLM on.
Maybe this is the time to get out the old Encyclopedia Britannica CD and use that for training input.
Google’s transformation of conventional methods into means of hypercapitalist surveillance is both pervasive and insidious. The “normal definition of that term” hides this.
You don't need "hypercapitalist surveillance" to show someone ads for a PS5 when they search for "buy PS5".
If they're doing surveillance they're not doing a good job of it, I make no effort to hide from them and approximately none of their ads are personalized to me. They are instead personalized to the search results instead of what they know from my history.
It’s a bit weird since Google is taking over the “burden of proof”-like liability. Up until now, once user clicked on a search result, they mentally judged the website’s credibility, not Google’s. Now every user will judge whether data coming from Google is reliable or not, which is a big risk to take on, in my opinion.
That latter point might be illuminating for a number of additional ideas. Specifically, should people have questioned Google's credibility from the start? Ie: these are the search results, vs this is what google chose.
Google did well in the old days for reasons. It beat alta vista and Yahoo by having better search results and a clean loading page. Since perhaps 08 (based on memory, that date might be off) or so, Google has dominated search, to the extent that it's not salient that search engines can be really questionable. Which is also to say, google dominated, people lost sight that searching and googling are different, that gives a lot of freedom for enshittification without people getting too upset or even quite realizing - it could be different and better
But only if you do a lot of filtering when going through responses. It’s kind of simple to do as a human, we see a ridiculous joke answer or obvious astroturfing and move on, but Reddit is like >99% noise, with people upvoting obviously wrong answer because it’s funny, lots of bot content, constant astroturfing attempts.
The users of r/montreal are so sick of lazy tourists constantly asking the same dumb "what's the best XYZ" questions without doing a basic search fit, the meme answer is always "bain colonial" which is a men-only spa for cruising. Often the topmost voted comment. I just tried asking gemini and chatgpt what that response meant and neither caught on..
No, it isn't. Humans interacting with human-generated text is generally fine. You cannot unleash a machine on the mountains of text stored on reddit and magically expect it to tell fact from fiction or sarcasm from bad intent.
> You cannot unleash a machine on the mountains of text stored on reddit and magically expect it to tell fact from fiction or sarcasm from bad intent
I didn't say you could, but that a machine can't decode the mountains of text doesn't mean that the answer isn't (perhaps only) on Reddit. I don't think people would be that interested in search engine that just serves content from books and academic papers.
The fact is that I think that there is not much written word, to actually train a sensible model on. A lot of books don't have OCRed scans, or a digital version. Humans can extrapolate knowledge from a relatively succinct book and some guidance. But I don't know how a model can add the common sense part (that we already have) that books relies on to transmit knowledge and ideas.
> The fact is that I think that there is not much written word, to actually train a sensible model on. A lot of books don't have OCRed scans, or a digital version.
Coincidentally, I was just watching a video about how South Africa has gone downhill - and that slide was hastened by McKinsey advising the crooked "Gupta brothers" on how to most efficiently rip off the country.
The problem in this case is not that it was trained on bad data. The AI summaries are just that - summaries - and there are bad results that it faithfully summarizes.
This is an attempt to reduce hallucinations coming full circle. A simple summarization model was meant to reduce hallucination risk, but now it's not discerning enough to exclude untruthful results from the summary.
Two reasons. The first, even ignoring that truth isn't necessarily widely agreed (is Donald Trump a raping fraud?), is that truth changes over time. eg is Donald Trump president? And presidents are the easiest case because we all know a fixed point in time when that is recalculated.
Second, Google's entire business model is built around spending nothing on content. Building clean pristinely labeled training sets is an extremely expensive thing to do at scale. Google has been in the business of stealing other people's data. Just one small example: if you produced (very expensive at scale) clean, multiple views, well lit photographs of your products for sale they would take those photos and show them on links to other people's stores; and if you didn't like that, they would kick you out of their shopping search. etc etc. Paying to produce content upends their business model. See eg the 5-10% profit margin well run news orgs have vs the 25% tech profit margin Google has even after all the money blown on moonshots.
Interesting that they move to touchscreens. With all the Hacker News stuff that comes by every day I can easily say that 99.9% is not what I do in daily life. But building control rooms for large industrial installations is. And from my perspective we see very little requests for touchscreens. They have a place, for example on a machine in an environment were a keyboard would be in the way. But only if the operator would not be wearing gloves. Very specific applications.
For large modern control rooms users will have either a keyboard and/or a custom button panel next to the mouse/trackball. With the mouse/trackball being the primary input device to click on objects on the screen. In many cases they don't even type in values but click on buttons on the screen to ramp up or ramp down a process value. Then they don't need a keyboard.
One advantage of using touchscreens in that very specific application is that it makes it easier to build simulators.
Every nuclear power plant has its own, somewhat unique control room, and to train operators properly, you have to replicate all the panels that make up that room, and it is much easier with touchscreens.
I fondly remember Fractint (https://www.fractint.org/). And these days I'm amazed at what it could calculate with the very limited CPU cycles at that time. I'm not sure how to compare a 386 running at 25MHz with my AMD 5950x that I have now.
Fractint did a lot of clever tricks, especially for the Mandelbrot fractal. For example, I remember they exploited that the Mandelbrot set is connected. So that means that if you found that the border of any rectangle is either completely inside or completely outside the set, you don't have to check the inside.
In order to have the "winter blues" you must know that it is winter. And in all my questions to ChatGPT I never had positive feedback that it knows what time it is, what date it is, and what the current season is.
My theory is that someone left a DEBUG=1 flag somewhere in the code and that the debug.log is filling up to 4 GB. I'm only joking a bit, I've been bitten enough times by these type of issues to know that they must happen all over the place.
You can also know this by reading the article too:
"Since the system prompt for ChatGPT feeds the bot the current date, people noted, some began to think there may be something to the idea."
The article suggests that ChatGPT slows down because it is winter and in the winter people (and data on which ChatGPT trained) sometimes slow down: the dark/gloomy/depressing winter feeling. To which I made the statement that ChatGPT does not know that it is winter so the hypothesis in the linked article does not hold up.
Several people have commented that ChatGPT does know the current time and date, so maybe there is indeed some truth in the linked article. But it does show how inconsistent ChatGPT can be: in any interaction I had with it I could not get CHatGPT to admit that it knew the current time, date, or season.
I do not know how it is for other people but I cannot be in a creative and problem-solving mood 8 hours a day. Heck: I have the best days were I actually type very little but still get to _finally_ understand and solve whatever I'm looking into.
Working efficiently is underrated.