I think the problem is that too many people use AI to write bullshit. Thus AI writing becomes a cue for bullshit.

For people who have internalized AI writing as a cue for bullshit, it is very difficult to read obvious AI writing without constantly being cue-ed that the thing they're reading is bullshit. Even if it's not.

Seems like you are getting caught up on the watch form-factor. If you think of it as a stripped down cell phone for a kid you don't want to have a cell phone yet, this product makes perfect sense.

>like you are getting caught up on the watch form-factor.

I'm getting caught up by the full fledged surveillance kit. Give them some independence and freedom instead of this a watch with an SOS button, we survived before ~2010

Definitely! But the form factor is really important: since it's strapped to their wrist they don't lose it. Classmates with phone-shaped phones seem to loose theirs a lot.

> If something is not in scope for your responsibility, obviously you must ask for permission.

Agree, but this can often be blurry.

> If it's in some weird edge case where you "feel" it is "in scope for your position" but you "want a bit of reassurance", then pick a lane.

I disagree here. I think there are often cases where this really functions as an "FYI" and is helpful. You are not shifting responsibility to the other party, but do...

* CYA if they say they weren't informed

* Get an opportunity for feedback without stalling progress in the case that they don't respond

IaC (capturing desired state declaratively) is a no-brainer for things like cloud resources IMO. Most use IaC for non-compute resources (e.x. DBs) and K8s for containerized compute workloads.

> But less so uniformity, since all providers are different

People sometimes misinterpret tools like Terraform supporting different vendors/hyperscalers as it providing a unified abstraction layer above them. As you note, it does not.

I simply fail to understand why automatic drift correction is considered important in this space. Cloud resources do not magically change themselves. Folks often cite rogue engineers making changes, but I prefer to deal with this scenario by whacking people with a stick and/or limiting access. Automatic drift correction can actually complicate making legitimate emergency changes to managed infrastructure.

If it’s open weight then anyone can run it for you. Presumably someone you trust just as much as US proprietary models.

I don't think they'll offer open models for long. Since they've actually invested in power, cheap chips, cheap memory and can subsidize tokens - they'll keep undercutting big models to capture data forever. Bonus if they remove ridiculous safeguards and China will be unstoppable.

Pretty sure they'll offer them at least so long as it takes to bring OpenAI and Anthropic into insolvency. Why wouldn't they? The Chinese models are way more nimble to train and run, bring in a ton of goodwill globally, and put immense pressure on the VC furnace that is the US AI sector.

And apparently OpenAI and Anthropic think so, too - why else would they try so hard to ban them instead of outcompeting them?

IIRC the Paris datacenter flood took down a whole “region” and some data was permanently unrecoverable.

This may be true, but from an editorial perspective they are openly and aggressively anti-Tesla. I think it's worth noting as this article is Tesla related.

While most every other articles on Tesla (historically) had been fawning megafans.

I can’t tell if “all gas no breaks” was intentional or not, but “no breaks” does seem to be a part of the culture shift within big tech around AI.

Facilitating "mass domestic surveillance" and "fully autonomous weapons" are social responsibilities now? Insanity.

LVT is a tax on the value of the land specifically, not a traditional property tax. This encourages development on valuable land that is currently being put to unproductive uses.

For example, if you own a lot in a downtown metro which is a parking lot you pay low property taxes because parking lots have low property values. You are disincentivised to develop it because your property tax would go up. Opposite incentives with a LVT.

I understand that, but what should the actual rate of the LVT be? If the LVT rate is too high, nobody will want to develop that parking lot at all because the taxes outweigh the possible profit. And if they are lower than land appreciation, speculation is encouraged.