GamingChairModel

joined 2 years ago
[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 9 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I went to the gym and used a forklift to lift the weights.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

But you're seeing a screenshot of an unmatched order that no driver has claimed yet. I'm saying that unless an actual match is accepted, that's not really evidence that people in a place don't tip well, just that some people don't get their orders filled.

If you never give less than $5, then any order you're involved in will involve at least a $5 tip. That may not be representative of the orders you're not involved with.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I think the user decides how much to tip in advance, and the app conveys that information to potential matches. Orders with low tips tend to sit there unclaimed, because no driver wants to bother with that

I'm not sure if Uber does it that way, but Doordash does.

I remember reading about a case a few years ago where a warehouse couldn't figure out which of its workers was just periodically taking shits in random corners of the warehouse. I think I'm starting to understand a different angle to that story, though.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It's got everything. Em dash. It's not X, it's Y. Emoji bullet points.

Perfect.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

AI companies are bankrupting themselves with training costs that they need to recoup back by selling inference.

I think they hit a wall in actual returns on performance with pretraining, years ago. Then they started scaling up on post-training/reinforcement learning to continue improvement, but that might be hitting a plateau as well. More recently it looks like they're relying more heavily on scaling up on inference, which is a significant problem for their long term business models.

If they're not able to cheaply deliver inference (and charge at a premium), how will they be able to sustain their businesses?

It seems that the most recent, largest models are using a lot more tokens to accomplish the same tasks, so even as token cost drops the actual cost of using the latest models seems to be going up with time (even as performance improves).

It's gonna be so fucking funny when the push to sell silicon that can run local models at 100 watts or less ends up destroying the business models of the companies that built out 100,000,000,000 watts of data centers.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, but that's always been true of paid software licenses for a particular version: it reaches EOL and you have to decide whether to live with the possibility of unpatched known vulnerabilities or pay for an upgrade to a more recent release.

MS Office has been doing this from back in the Windows 3.0 days at least.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The only solution is to make sure they can't read data you don't want shared.

Isn't that the appropriate guardrail, then? LLM chats and agents and whatever need to be contained with external permissions settings that the LLMs simply do not and can never have the power to override.

In a normal customer service setting with human agents, there are still plenty of examples of what a human agent simply doesn't have the power to do. Often, they'll need to escalate to a manager to do things like process refunds not just because they weren't given social permission to do so, but because they weren't given technical permissions to do so. LLM agents need to be contained in the same way. Any decent use of agents, human or software, requires carefully designed processes and permissions extrinsic to that agent's own decisionmaking abilities to make sure that agents don't do something bad for the company.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Edit 2: Nevermind. 13th October is the day Microslop has chosen to fuck me: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/system-requirements/end-of-support-for-office-2021

You'll still get a few years before the software becomes remotely disabled, though. This story about Office 2019 losing functionality follows Office 2019 losing support in 2023. If that's the rate things go, then maybe Office 2021 will lose functionality either 2 years from now (7 years after release) or 3 years from now (3 years after losing support).

Macbooks have had Thunderbolt 3 (the protocol) over USB-C (the physical form factor) since about 2015. The Thunderbolt 3 protocol became incorporated into the USB 4 standard in 2019 (and is implemented on the physical USB-C port).

Earlier versions of Thunderbolt were proprietary standards jointly controlled by Apple and Intel, but implemented over Mini-DisplayPort connectors. They were phased out in new devices starting in around 2015.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 49 points 4 days ago (6 children)

Passports really should be using four digit years.

 

Curious what everyone else is doing with all the files that are generated by photography as a hobby/interest/profession. What's your working setup, how do you share with others, and how are you backing things up?

view more: next ›