![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/170721ad-9010-470f-a4a4-ead95f51f13b.png)
The amount of people who say they do agile/kanban/scrum but have never talked to a customer/end user, let alone released something, is frightening
The amount of people who say they do agile/kanban/scrum but have never talked to a customer/end user, let alone released something, is frightening
You don’t necessarily need types for that kind of thing though, a strict linter that flags that code works just as well
Admittedly I expect that most things I would not end up liking, but the ability to try would be really nice.
Man, what a great attitude. I wish everyone was this open about food.
It doesn’t exist until they release the butthole cut
Fuck their profit margins, and fuck the shitty double standard billionaires and their holdings are held to. If I’m expected to be energy conscious as an individual, I don’t think it’s too much to ask for these rich fucks to make their companies energy conscious as well.
No shit people are utilizing things. That’s not the point. The point is that on the way to providing these services, they harm the environment disproportionately more than you or I. As your first article points out:
"AI doesn’t have to be super, super data-hungry or super, super compute-hungry,” says Donti. Instead, we can “imagine AI differently.”
That’s the point. The billionaires and their megacorps could do it better. Your article points out a bunch of ways for LLMs to use less energy, and the amount of energy doing that would save would be orders of magnitude more than if people cut back or stopped their use, or whatever it is you’re suggesting.
Sorry, didn’t realize we were doing the theatrical pedantry thing, let me clarify: we want the companies that the billionaires own and control to stop using so much fucking energy and making things disproportionately worse for everyone.
Better?
Yet… somehow they want to freeze the entirety of the world, magically build enough wind, solar, and hydro to power everything, then just… turn it back on again.
No, we want billionaires to stop using so much fucking energy and making things disproportionately worse for everyone
We used to do this with thumb drives. You can get a 128G usb3 thumb drive these days for like 20 bucks in the checkout line of most electronics stores. Cool things about a thumb* drive is I don’t need to pay a subscription fee for it, it doesn’t need an Internet connection, and it isn’t liable to be rifled through by Microsoft unless Bill Gates comes to your house and steals it from you.
You’re goddamn right I don’t, but I don’t have a choice due to where I live. A car is a tool to me, in the same way that a vacuum cleaner or a push lawnmower is a tool. The most important thing a car should do for me is reliably get me from point a to point b in relative comfort. I could give a fuck about the “true driving experience” of a manual transmission.
Ok that black van model goes way harder than it has any right to
Now I want nothing more than to parade around in front of a bunch of conservatives in a “Make Butt Fart Again” hat
All they know is projection
The voting populace should be smart enough to not vote in a convicted felon in most cases, but it shouldn’t exclude you from running. Else felony convictions could be used as a political tool to bar your opponents from running.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cavallaro
James Cavallaro is a law professor that teaches or has taught at Wesleyan… And also Yale, Columbia, and UC Berkeley. He’s currently the executive director of the University Network for Human Rights, and before that founded the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic at, uh let’s see here… Oh yeah, Stanford.
Also, Wesleyan University, by the way, rivals Ivy League schools as far as academic rigor goes.
You trying to diminish the validity of these organizations would work a lot better if you bothered to Google them for five seconds first.
To be fair, your explanations have been pretty shit, so
Are you suggesting that the United States Supreme Court weighs in on scientific studies that haven’t been replicated yet?
No. The scientific community polices* itself with peer review. The rogue and stupid communities are peer reviewed out of existence. You can submit all the falsified “research” you want, but if your published results can’t be replicated, you will be labeled a quack and your “findings” will go ignored by the rest of the scientific community.
No government-affiliated judicial body is involved in verifying science, because judges are experts in law, not science.
And what happens when medical science increases life expectancy?
Make the upper age limit be average life expectancy minus X years. This has the added bonus of motivating politicians to actually try to increase average life expectancy.
Who decides what “well known facts” are?
The scientific community, and certainly not the Supreme Court. Not sure how you came to that conclusion.
Nah, hackthebox and many other red team simulation type sites have strict rules of engagement. You’re there to solve a puzzle as defined by hackthebox, not get around the puzzle by hacking hackthebox.