pixxelkick @ pixxelkick @lemmy.world

Posts

4

Comments

888

Joined

2 yr. ago

"Hey internet I was thinking of cutting some of my babies dick off"

"Bro wtf what"

"Just a lil bit, just the tip!"

"Aw okay that's fine mate!"

Did you think this would be how it goes?

Don't.... cut parts of your baby's dick off dude, it's a weird thing to do.

... Proceeds to use Svelte cuz it has the exact features I want

React is popular but I honestly don't care about llm weenie vibe coder junior devs being biased towards react. Lions don't concern themselves with the opinions of sheep.

The majority of shit apps are being made with react sure.

But skilled seniors who intend to make something robust don't even tend to have an llm enabled that will even influence their opinion on the first place. The majority of senior devs keep repeating the same sentiment: llms primarily are slowing them down more than helping.

Junior devs that crutch on llms are falling behind and the quality of their output shows. They grow slower and produce worse output.

It's one thing to use it for monotonous tasks, but if it influences your higher level important decisions you are probably already cooked.

Whenever a racing game comes out and they put sonic in a vehicle, I wish they'd note it in the lore itself

It's gotta be a case of "sonic we are putting you in this car to make this race fair" which I'd find hilarious if they acknowledge it out loud.

IE have him say something like "don't make me get out of this car" or whatever as a threat, or, "I'd have won if I wasn't in this hunk of junk" or etc

The entire concept of Sonic in a car is hilarious to me, because while everyone else is going fast, he's just like "oh my goooood why is this thing so slooooww"

What makes that the more likely scenario?

Because it's their facility

this facility has never had this issue until the FBI showed up to commandeer their incinerator.

Says who?

For all we know they've had issues everytime they incinerate but they ignored it cuz a lil bit of smoke from 1 cat is way easier to shrug off compared to a huge amount of meth

It's very possible they just have been ignoring the problem because normal smoke from incineration a very small cadaver isn't a big deal, whereas meth fumes are extremely toxic and not something you can just shrug off

Lord knows I've worked with workers who have the "I've been doing it this way for 10 years and never had an issue, don't be a pussy" type of attitude too

So hard to say, without more info it's basically just us speculating.

rather than the FBI for their clear incompetence?

The article has not stated who was responsible for operation of the facility.

It's more likely the responsibility was on the staff to ensure the equipment at their own facility was functioning right

This sort of error should have been covered by prior operation licensing checks, a facility with an incinerator on premises shouldn't have negative pressure issues

So something somehow caused a negative pressure issue.

Usually the culprit is some kind of exhaust fan being run, or a door being left open too long

Based on time of year and how hot out it is, I wonder if a staff member left a door propped open or something.

Incinerator systems need positive pressure overall.

Anyone who lives in the north and has a gas based furnace heating system knows how deadly negative air pressure can be...

Read the article:

The incinerator is usually used by animal control officers to dispose of euthanised animals, but local authorities said it can also be used by law enforcement to burn seized narcotics.

The incident was caused when smoke was pushed in the wrong direction because of negative pressure, according to Assistant City Administrator Kevin Iffland.

That sounds like it wasn't a method specific issue, and if anything had been burnt in that incinerator it would've caused the same issue.

Sounds like the facility wasn't setup right, any facility with an incinerator should definitely have positive pressure, not negative.

Getting a later special meeting request with the ceo, at one company, because he wanted feedback on their interview process itself. He then offered me a different job and I had to decline cuz I already accepted another (this was a few weeks after the initial decline I gave)

In another case they just fast tracked me and I ended up declining the job anyways (didn't like the job)

I'm full time employed but I still do occasiobal interviews to keep feelers out for how the market is. But I typically decline most offers cuz they're not good enough to get me to actively quit my current job.

Same, I've started just stating I have a maximum of 3 interviews I do before I auto-reject the offer.

This has had interesting results.

The only thing indicating it was a pit bull was the lady claiming it was a pit bull.

Classic high quality journalism. Zero effort put into actually confirming.

because by not signing, there won’t be a referendum at all, right?

Only a fool would hope for this.

You seem hell bent on trying to frame this as "yeah but its totally gonna fail"

Thats a dumb assumption to make, it's very much possible the "bad" referendum succeeds, so hedging your bets on it failing is just a dumb idea.

the petition is really “sign this if you want a referendum” isn’t it?

No, its "Sign this to at least make the referendum thats pretty likely to happen at least not have such a poorly framed question"

I would assume it's going to happen, it's wishful thinking to assume it wont.

But if it fails

Thatd be an extremely foolish thing to hedge your bets on, it very well could get enough signatures.

In the "right" use case, story points should just represent relative effort.

The hours dont matter, its more about ranking how challenging a task is, in order to help the manager rank the priority of tasks.

You should have typically 2~3 metrics:

1. Points, which represent relative effort of the task to the other tasks you are also ranking.
2. Value, how much value does doing this task provide, how important is it
3. Risk, how risky is it that this might break shit though if you make these changes (IE new features typically are low risk since they just add stuff, but if you have to modify old stuff now your risk goes up)

If you have a good integration testing system automated, Risk can be mostly removed since you can just rely on your testing framework to catch if something is gonna explode.

Then your manager can use a formula with these values to basically rank a priority order for every ticket you now scored, in order to assess what the next thing is that is best to focus on.

This is why I like neorg plugin on neovim

I just have a directory for todos, checklists, reference files, etc.

And I can peruse it easily with nvim-tree

And I just have a hotkey to toggle state of items (todo, done, paused, represented by empty box, checked box, clock, respectively)

But in the end it's just editting a raw text file.

Lol, are you actually getting downvoted for all this?

Everything this person wrote is correct. Free Speech protects you from the government, not other individuals.

pseudo-intellectual bullshit

They are 100% correct mate, everything they wrote is right. Just because you lack the capacity to understand something, doesn't make it bullshit...

This isn't just cruelty

You don't want trans people actively in your military when the insurrection starts.

The expediency here should make it clear how fast paced the plans are.

I hope you dont use any of the other standard quality of life features day to day that consume substantially more power per day then.

There's plenty of stuff you likely take for granted every day that you use, that burn way more fossil fuels than training GPT took.

GPT did cost a lot of power, but if you put it beside other fairly standard day-to-day things people tend to take for granted, it's a drop in the bucket.

• Air conditioning, both at your home if you use it, your work if you have it, stores you visit, etc etc
• Public transit
• Your stove
• Your microwave
• Your water kettle
• Your heating systems everywhere you go
• Your computer
• Your phone
• The internet
• Emergency response systems
• Your clothes washer and dryer

The list goes on and on. ESPECIALLY your clothes dryer, that thing uses a massive amount of power

People seriously underestimate how much power the internet uses overall. GPT's training provides a concrete, discrete, measured amount of power one specific thing used.

Whereas the internet, as a whole, over one day, uses way more power than all of GPT's training took total. The issue is "the internet" has its power consumption broadly distributed across the entire globe, in a manner that makes it basically impossible to actually measure how much "total" power you are burning just browsing the web.

But it's non trivial. Every switch between you and your destination is burning in the range of 150 watts, easily, every router is burning easily 80 watts, etc etc.

And theres dozens of those between you and 1 given destination. The process of routing your packets from your machine all the way across countries at the speed of light, and then a response back, takes a non trivial amount of power. Theres often around 8 to 15 hops between you and the destination, and every single hop tends to have multiple machines involved in that one single packet.

Its easy to handwave that enormous power consumption away because, well, you can't see it. You aren't privvy to how much power your ISP burns every day, how much power the nameservers use, etc etc.

GPT is a non trivial chunk of power... but its not THAT much compared to all the other shit going on in the web, its genuinely just a tiny drop in the bucket.

You are extremely naive if you think using GPT makes any kind of notable shift in your total carbon footprint, it doesnt even move the dial at all.

If you actually wanna pick something as a real target for reducing your carbon footprint, the two biggest contenders are:

1. Use public transit, or better yet, bike/walk/run to work. If you work from home, good!
2. Dry your clothes via hangers instead of a dryer

Thats irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

That's like arguing needles were a bad invention because many people use them for heroin.

People using the tool wrong to hurt themselves doesn't mean the tool is bad, it just means better regulations and education needs to be put in place.