The incredibly silly true answer is that the software industry’s love for “deploy early, deploy often” has led to all embedded devices shipping with over-the-air (OTA) update support even when it barely makes sense. The earliest units of a given product run will ship with a minimally viable product build that has lots of bugs, but solid OTA.

Fun anecdote: I had a TV backlight die after about 3 years, and the root cause was a shitty embedded app that incorrectly regulated the voltage for the LED strips.

Adm. Brad Cooper, commander of U.S. Central Command, said Iran launched an attack against the American naval and commercial vessels that passed through the strait, leading the U.S. to destroy six Iranian small boats. (Iran’s state-run news outlets have denied that its boats were destroyed and claimed no commercial vessels have crossed through the strait recently.)

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, admiral. I have a lot of trouble believing that any commercial shipping company wanted to join you in this idiotic exercise.

My (WASP) grandmother used to do this too. The fruit ones were alright. The other ones were not.

To date, the only countries that have made progress in blocking VPN traffic with some success are authoritarian regimes with ISP-level surveillance.

You know you’re on to something when the only playbook you can find was written by the Chinese government.

Real answers: gitlab has awesome integrated CI, and you can always go for a remote integration if you prefer (e.g. self-hosted Jenkins, or a managed solution like circleci).

Holy shit

I think that the code of conduct pre-diff is less professional but totally unambiguous about AI-generated contributions, so I’m not sure where your confusion is coming from. And I have already spent more time looking for evidence of your claims than you have, so no thanks, I think that unless you present something of substance I’m good.

I don’t understand what you’re trying to insinuate here. Are you trying to “both sides” a state-sponsored murder?

I’m not sure how you think they aim to achieve that business lock-in, but many of us suspect it’s by offering a product that replaces workers.

Ok, I just searched their codeberg for the word “fuck” and both (yes, exactly 2) closed MRs were, in fact, heaps of LLM puke with no engagement from the “author”. More importantly, both of these were created after the policy was posted.

I think your argument is nonsense. Post evidence if you have it, but I’m guessing you won’t.

Yea, if you remove all context, you could make that argument. But if we narrowly focus on “the generations of the future overwhelmingly see this as a problem they must fix” then I think it stands to reason that the AI fanboys haven’t won everyone over yet, which is what the person you’re replying to was actually saying.

Why are you so sure this is “revisionism”? They’re not trying to rewrite history, they’re trying to explain their staunch policy.

It’s their project, and if they want to carefully select contributors they think will stick around and be a member of the community, then that is entirely their prerogative. This is a viable model for a niche project. There’s no requirement that they invest time and energy to review and integrate every last PR.

I mean, just last year Disney learned the hard way that acquiescing to Trump’s whim invites volatility when they suspended Jimmy Kimmel in June. Subscribers fled in droves, they had to bring him back on… It was a shit show they’re unlikely to want to repeat.

The easy solution is to make no publicly visible moves and wait patiently.

Very true, but investors are sensitive to changes in the wind. Trump is looking very weak these days, and any company who allows themselves to be cowed by his parlor tricks will lose investor confidence.

This seems like a terrible approach to me that will put canonical at an extreme disadvantage.

Software providers that try to do everything themselves have historically failed, a harsh lesson that smart people can still learn without having to make the mistake. Canonical is setting itself up to be a cheap knockoff and get outcompeted by Microsoft who can throw Herculean amounts of compute power and engineering hours at their monstrosity.

A smarter play is to provide extensible software that works with modern protocols to enable integration with AI tools for people who want them, and people who want to focus on developing them. This creates a platform that people want to buy into an support.

Please, canonical, pull your heads out of your asses before it’s too late.

We could look at historical values and predictions, but I actually love the “is it enough” question from a philosophical or first principles perspective.

Keeb dribing undil yuo reach kieb :D

Actual strategy of the Russian army, 2022

Yeah, I was initially pretty interested because a player like Apple can really push the envelope and drive innovation. I am still wistfully hoping for a portable office AR setup one day.

Live events (like sports) would be cool, but I’m not sure Apple wants to play licensing/marketing matchmaker at the scale required for that to be profitable. From what I’ve heard, it’s the worst part of being in the streaming industry.

“Any honest assessment of the [EPA] pesticide office’s track record can only conclude that it has failed catastrophically at assessing the health risks of dangerous pesticides,” Glass said. “Considering the EPA has declined to require cancer labels on 99 percent of the pesticide products that contain chemicals the agency itself has found to be probable carcinogens, why would anyone believe that Americans’ health is being looked out for by the EPA or the pesticide industry?”

If the EPA really wants that responsibility and privilege, then they need to convince us they can do it. Otherwise, the people will do it themselves.

By the same token, if the SC wants the responsibility and privilege of being the arbiters of justice…

A recent survey by AI orchestration platform provider Zapier of 542 US executives with active AI vendor contracts, found that nearly 90 percent believed they could switch AI vendors within four weeks, and 41 percent said they could do it in just 2–5 business days.

I work at a Fortune 500 and I’m the point of contact for half a dozen vendors, so I have a lot of visibility into the legal and procurement challenges. I can say with absolute confidence that even our annual renewals with existing vendors don’t go through in 4 weeks.

Who are these executives that have absolutely no understanding of their own companies?