Pup Biru

viruses also don’t just “do” things, but here we are with COVID and bird flu

assuming you need to be fast that’s true, but if you don’t care how much time you take then you can spread the processing out… this is exactly how MoE models are much easier to run locally, but you could go much further

my CV has objectives, code skills, and infra skills right at the top: 1 para each

work experience also has some relatively plain english: achievements and responsibilities as bullet point sentences

all of these contain opinions somewhere… usually in the form of “i thought and pushed for this, worked great”

objectives is almost entirely opinion: the way i think about systems and what i want to achieve in a professional context

job platforms are the grindr of job search… flaky, poorly built, disappointing experiences, and you feel dirty afterwards

(and this isn’t slut shaming; this is just… grindr is a trash fire)

you may be pleased to know that this was required works in order to build the new station, so, much like laying foundations the rest of the build for the train is coming but these things don’t magically happen overnight

it’s tricky though… this used to be exactly the rules until they removed a huge number of requirements for .au domains, and it helped to curb squatting. it wasn’t a perfect solution, but they number of squatted .au domains since the change has shot way up

to properly solve the issue of squatting, you can’t grandfather domains otherwise already squatted domains would be held probably for even longer because they can’t cheaply pick up more

you can probably introduce more rules with words like “primary business purpose” etc, but auDA just doesn’t have the resources to really litigate all the grey areas that’d introduce

but for sure if “registered business name” doesn’t including trading as names and things like ad campaigns then that’s incorrect

unlikely if you install from official repos, but it’s a more common occurrence installing random debs or curl totallylegit.ru | bash…. or… installing from rpms :p (which if something only ships via rpm is likely to be enterprise and targeting RHEL rather than fedora, so super old and a non-trivial chance of random patches to libraries)

socialists, maybe… depends of their policies are actually fully worked out; maybe give them 20 years of build up and see how it goes, but right now (as much as i agree with their direction) they don’t have enough actual policy to run a state

greens… imo they have proven they can’t run a government as much as i agree with some of their points: they don’t make reasonable compromise and deny good policy to score points rather than actually improving things (you move the overton window by doing things not by yelling about shit)

imo labor in victoria has done a pretty good job… there have been some stumbles, but they’ve also achieved a lot (and outcomes are better than principals). melbourne is the fastest growing city in australia, and it’s because we have a (vaguely) competent, uninteresting government that’s just getting the job done… greens don’t have her competence to govern, liberals and one nation certainly don’t

the mechanical loom isn’t analogous to LLMs exactly, but the current generation of AI also includes things like self driving vehicles, which (whilst not ready) is, imo, set to make a huge portion of the logistics industry redundant in the next 20-30 years if not sooner, and the logistics industry is enormous

china having human rights abuses is not an argument against retraining people when technology starts to make jobs redundant

the luddites were taylors and the like fighting against being replaced by machines for various reasons, including child labour, low wages for machine operators, and low quality product

imo child labour laws are the way to solve the first problem: that’s, imo, unrelated to industrialisation/mechanisation

lower wages are a product of lowering the barrier to entry: when anyone can do the same job, that is not a bad thing… it’s sad that an industry of people are pushed out of their profession, but we’d never say the same of coal: coal miners should realise that their industry is not going to exist any more, and retrain,… i have empathy for them, which is why we need to provide social programs to cover industries that get made redundant for any reason, but that’s not a reason to deny the rest of humanity the plenty that inevitably comes from industrialisation

and low quality product is only really an issue at the very start of industrialisation… i guarantee these days we can make higher quality clothing in 100x the quantity than we can with artisans and hand stitching… machines always get better, but only if there’s effort put into using them

yeah… as i said, they had a point in the moment

in 2026 we have retraining programs and social security programs… these are the solutions to industrialisation; not ignorance… the longer you fight industrialisation the harder it hits because rather than happening gradually it happens all at once and society has a harder time absorbing it

the “article” that doesn’t mention luddites at all until a comment at the end that kinda agrees with what i’m saying or the wikipedia article that points out the luddites issues being about labour and generally being replaced by machines? i know very well the nuance of the luddite movement and their main good points, as i said, were about labour issues (mostly solved with labour laws on modern society) and the takeaway isn’t about technology but about how to deal with technology replacing people’s jobs

replacing artisans with machines that do a good enough or better job is a good thing, as painful as it is… it means more people get more of the thing… artisans instead of machines is a waste… humans are the most inefficient general machine we have… having a human make clothing is a cost on society

an LLM frequently writes shit tests… you’re just moving the architecture problem: either you properly understand and review the initial code, which means you catch not just binary “correct input/output” but also performance, layout, DRY, style, heaps of things

OR

you properly review the tests because “passing” doesn’t mean tested

i definitely agree, but plenty leading to waste doesn’t mean that plenty is a bad thing

having enough food to not worry about food waste is definitively a good problem to have. ideally we don’t have food waste because we don’t have enough food for everyone, but just because plenty leads to waste at least initially isn’t an argument against plenty

i’d say it’s not quite like a compiler because you still need to know what the code does… a compiler you largely don’t care, and it’s deterministic… an LLM hallucinates, so you can’t just trust it, which means you have to be able to assess when it’s doing the wrong thing

i agree that setting an agent going helping you learn a codebase is reasonable, largely because it can quickly point out connections in the code quicker than you can understand the architecture, and its guesses are usually just as good as your guesses until you get knowledgeable with the codebase

however, and that’s a very load-bearing however, i don’t think you should just jump into a codebase and just go ahead and tell the LLM to write new code without understanding what it’s done… the understanding is exactly what this graph is trying to show: actually learning is critical, so your review of the code becomes doubly important: you’re gaining institutional knowledge, and you’re making sure the output isn’t slop

they were absolutely not right… the modern world of plentiful clothing simply wouldn’t be possible without industrial clothing machinery (and i’m not talking about fast fashion and waste - though industrial clothing also makes those things possible, i think that’s an outcome of the plenty rather than an inevitable outcome of industrialised clothing)

artisans don’t magically make better clothing… in fact, modern machinery can and does produce much higher quality, complex clothing than a human alone would, and in much higher volumes

they had a moment when they had a point, when the machinery just wasn’t very good (and of course the child labour concerns)

clothing quality on the modern era comes down to choices far far more than the skill of the person making the clothing… artisans are still able to make cost cutting decisions

the point we should take away from the luddites is more about retraining than about their core point… this applies to coal miners and the green transition, and will at some point in the future apply to the logistics industry when driverless trucks become reliable: we can’t just toss an entire industry out of work and expect them to be okay with it (or for that matter expect the economy to absorb them)… but it’s a much better world when fewer people are required to achieve the same output

the luddites had a point… in the moment… kinda… but i think have largely been pretty conclusively proven wrong… clothing is now plentiful, and i doubt anyone would want to go back to paying taylors to make all their clothes for 10x more, even if the clothing would be much higher quality, which i even doubt: clothing quality doesn’t come down to artisan skill any more, it comes down to choices you make, and an artisan can still make cost cutting decisions on fabric, construction, etc

trams clog up roads is so laughable

okay so let’s do a thought experiment… you also say trams are crowded? well those people still need to get from a to b within the 10min window that the tram runs, so let’s remove the tram and put them all in their own car: what do you reckon? roads are gonna flow better? or na?

now take that image you had and double the trams and take that many cars off the road… reckon the roads would flow better? i’m thinking probably

ko-fly preferable to ko-squito… they’re both pests but those fees really sting