I signed our Slack Enterprise contract this week. Yes, it is insanely expensive. But if time is money, the alternatives would've been far costlier. (Do not interpret this as me having any special love for Slack. It's just the lesser evil in this context.)
I documented a recent experience joining another company's Teams instance:
---
To log into the Teams website on my Mac:
* Use Passwords to log into Okta.
* Use Okta Verify + Touch ID for MFA.
* Log into Teams with Okta.
* Install Microsoft Authenticator on my phone because Okta’s SSO isn’t enough for MS.
* Log into my work account in Microsoft Authenticator. (Bonus: typing an Okta password into some random app’s webview gives me the warm fuzzies!)
* Bounce to Okta Verify + Face ID on my phone for MFA.
* Scan the QR code on my Mac with my phone.
* Enter the 2 digit code shown on my Mac to double-plus authenticate with Microsoft Authenticator.
As punishment for doing all this correctly, finally have to use Teams.
---
This is 100% accurate. Halfway through the hoopjumping, I realized it was ridiculous and started over from scratch so I could record each step of it.
I'm certain some step in there is necessary to support Outlook Express, and they can't clean up the process without annoying some bank paying for enterprise support of their Windows Server 2003 setup. These are the downsides of eternal backward compatibility.
I own a Stephen King novel. I'm looking at it right now. Your contention is that I can sell or give away as many copies as I want of it, and if not, why?
Who’s vibecoding the kernel? I’ve heard stories of devs using AI to help write code, but don’t recall a single story of an experienced kernel dev vibecoding anything.
I’m strongly with you on that. Current models aren’t perfect, but neither am I. In a lot of my daily use, they’re as good as or better than I am at certain tasks.
I hear people around me talking about a bad experience they had with ChatGPT last summer as though it proves all AI coding is “slop”. Honestly, it makes me sad for them. There are reasons to dislike AI, but so many detractors skip right past those to anecdata that just aren’t relevant anymore, if they ever were.
I've had a lot of bad experiences with current chatgpt (mainly, it tends to just get sidetracked and hyper-fixated on literally anything, so if I give it a rodmap of tasks to do it will fixate on the first one and keep adding caveats as to why something isn't complete) and a lot more success with Claude (not) doing that. But I don't use Codex, but chat chatgpt (I don't have the max plans so Codex gobbles up usage limits in like 20 minutes even on the simplest of tasks) so Idk, maybe that's why?
To counter the bad though: right now Claude and I have been doing some very interesting work on acoustics and advancing steam audio. I've been researching this for several years trying on and off again to make my hopes a reality but could never take all the math and make something coherent out of it by hand, and Claude has helped with that (well, and Steam Audio). The trouble mainly comes from being blind and trying to build geometry from code and not being able to mentally visualize the geometry in question (which is also why I struggle with physics engines). It's been really fun just experimenting with this and seeing how good it gets. Who knows, I might make it a library that I publish someday.
Current models are still worse than I am, or any competent developer I've ever worked with. You act as though people tried ChatGPT in 2023 and gave up forever, but that isn't what is happening here. The cold hard truth is that, contrary to what AI boosters claim, LLMs still suck at programming and output slop.
> I hear people around me talking about a bad experience they had with ChatGPT last summer as though it proves all AI coding is “slop”.
They always quit right before it got good.
> Honestly, it makes me sad for them.
The the consternation? They’re going to be obsoleted in no time anyway, so we’re told. Are they missing out on some months’ worth of coasting as meat proxies before exponential takeoff? Is that the sad part?
> HAMs are typically empowered [in their rule-following] by actual telecommunications agencies [who have] legislative authority to enter premises and what have you to resolve issues
That is, hams (not "HAMs") feel empowered to advise others to obey the law, because they have to work with government agencies who can make life unpleasant for those who don't. It's not "hams [have] legislative authority".
The Radiotelecommunications Act in Canada (1), section 8, describes the powers of ISEC inspectors. They can request warrants to enter private dwellings, and if accompanied by peace officers and if permitted by the warrant, use force.
This was something that was highlighted during my amateur radio course almost 20 years ago.
That makes more sense. Although the image of some 70 year old ham battering down a door with his Zimmer frame to give a 6 hour lecture on spurious emissions is amusing.
When it does, it often leads to prosecution, or at least reputational damage. But I can go nuts on my own LAN without affecting yours in any way. It's not possible for me to conduct wild RF experiments in my own house and not affect my neighbors.
It would be hard for me to physically interfere with an airport without having armed guards descend upon me. It would not be hard for me to build a radio that could strongly interfere with airplanes on final approach. The FCC rules that make it illegal and also bring the wrath of the feds down upon you are the sorts of regulations I actually support, along with air and water pollution controls, weight limits on trucks using taxpayer-owned highways, banning of mining in public parks, and other things that keep our shared spaces safe and usable.
Yeah, I'm sure there are some people who need to spend down their FSA or something. Withings ran the numbers and decided it was worth their return on investment, and they know way more about it than I do. However, I would not have guessed it would be enough to turn a profit.
reply