> Modernism is the act of using cheaper resources and more standardized/cheaper methods of production.
That's how they sold it, but it's not true. By the end of the 19th century, all the building ornamentation that you can still see in European capitals, had been stadardized and was mass-produced, while the construction techniques using brick and mortar had been further refined, yielding building designs that were cheap to construct and easy to maintain.
Modernist buildings were, at the same time, more expensive to build and less durable because of the reinforced concrete which has a much shorter lifespan than stone or brick plus mortar. The only advantage they had was that of increased height, but that was only an issue due to the restrictive zoning in Anglo countries. Without NIMBYism that pushed towards sky-scrapers, NYC could well have ended up like Paris: replacing 1-3 stories buildings with 8-10 stories, but allowing mixed commercial/residential space everywhere.
Given that models have been trained on tons of academic papers as well as internal corporate documentation, it's no surprise their output sounds a lot like an unholy fusion of both styles.
It looks nice but I can't load any comments, and I believe it's because I have Firefox's Enhanced Tracking Protection turned on to the strictest level.
I see no mention of foreign keys, or any other constraints, across shards. If, as I suspect, they're not implemented, it would still be useful but at the level of Spanner 10 years ago.
Are you one of the developers ? If so, you need to add a specific page explaining in detail the guarantees that this gives.
For example: point 08 says "Assign different tables or workloads to different shard groups" and point 02 says "Split hot shards as workloads grow". How do those interact ? Can a single table be split across multiple shards ? If so don't you need 2pc to enforce primary key constraints ?
Different people have different feelings. Bucketing into binary "good" and "not good" based on whether they have the exact same framing as you do is dehumanizing. Stop it. Respect other people.
There is space for nuance:
If you're spitting out raw LLM output and not looking at or reading it and requiring other people to use it as-is, while representing it as your own original work, you are treating your own time and attention as more valuable than that of others. You can expect a reaction based on this.
If you're blanket-dismissing someone else's work because they used one or more specific tools, regardless of how much of their own time and attention they put into it before sharing it in a place where you were able to see it -- or perhaps you're doing that dismissal without even seeing it -- you are treating their time and attention as superficial and a rounding error compared with their choice of tools. You can expect a reaction based on this.
In between, there is a _whole_ lot of room for different take and opinions, and we're collectively figuring out what's acceptable and what isn't. We'll never fully get there and that is Okay. But we can at least try to calibrate on "are we treating other people respectfully" instead of a shitty proxy for it.
One of these things was wholesale systemized actual state-run murder. The other is a range that encompasses big companies run by awful people and also a binary blob I can run on a GPU in my basement.
I mean, I agree. But it also has some drawbacks. Uber is a perfect example of this - they completed ignored the existing taxi and private hire laws, ate the penalties left right and centre and while they still suck they dragged taxis kicking and screaming into the 21st century in the UK. The days of being overcharged by a driver who takes a notion and a new route, or finding out the card machine isn’t working at your destination are gone, and that’s because Uber forced them to stop acting like an actual Cartel.
I would have preferred the old ways if that means upholding the rule of law. American MBAs are pure evil and toxic for a society's social fabric, and they should be kept away as much as possible, even if that means putting up with some guild-like behaviour.
How is it not? A platform deciding on a whim what sort of content can get your hosted site banned? That’s the definition of arbitrary and the definition of censorship.
It’s not government censorship, but it’s censorship nonetheless.
A mistake that both Dan and the forum users made, was to discuss averages instead of reliability for certain platforms and/or engine types. Most manufacturers have models with wildly different reliability.
That's how they sold it, but it's not true. By the end of the 19th century, all the building ornamentation that you can still see in European capitals, had been stadardized and was mass-produced, while the construction techniques using brick and mortar had been further refined, yielding building designs that were cheap to construct and easy to maintain.
Modernist buildings were, at the same time, more expensive to build and less durable because of the reinforced concrete which has a much shorter lifespan than stone or brick plus mortar. The only advantage they had was that of increased height, but that was only an issue due to the restrictive zoning in Anglo countries. Without NIMBYism that pushed towards sky-scrapers, NYC could well have ended up like Paris: replacing 1-3 stories buildings with 8-10 stories, but allowing mixed commercial/residential space everywhere.
reply