Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 14
Comments 923
When ChatGPT summarises, it actually does nothing of the kind
  • At a consulting job I did recently they got an AI for a specific task to have an 25% rejection rate. Which I thought was pretty good and the team working on it said there was no way they could do better, this is the absolute best.

    So they went and asked the customers if they would be interested in this feature and how much they would be willing to pay. The response was nobody was willing to pay at all for the feature and a 25% rejection rate was too high.

    The reason customers gave was this meant they still need a human to check the results, so the human is still in the loop. And because the human basically has to do most of if not all of the work to check the result, it didn't really save that much time. And knowing their people, they will probably slack on the checks, since most are correct. Which then leads to incorrect data going forward. This was simply not something customers wanted, they want to replace the humans and have it do better, not worse.

    And paying for it is out of the question, because so many companies are offering AI for free or close to free. Plus they see it as a cost saving measure and paying for it means it has to save even more time for it to be worth.

    So they put the project on ice for now, hoping the technology improves. The next customer poll they did, AI was the most requested feature. This caused some grumbles.

  • Doing it this way is interesting anyway
  • This is not the best idea, when you answer they know it's a live number. Your number will be sold and before long you'll get even more spam calls. I love the feature on my phone that identifies and blocks spam calls automatically

  • Has to be those frozen wind turbines and solar panels...
  • Sure! This is the report: March 2022.pdf

    It has a description of the methods and the ISO standards they use to determine life-cycle CO2, from the cradle to the grave numbers. It also includes all the references and sources. I'm sure there's a lot more info available about the research they did, but this is the high-level report.

    The UN seems like a pretty reliable source and the report seems very thorough, but I'm not qualified to say where they went wrong. So I would love to see what other sources say on the subject.

    Edit: They even state in their report why the value they give for nuclear is on the low end of most accepted literature:

    This value is comparable to the lower range of literature values because of the following assumptions: revised energy inputs for mining and milling, including electricity inputs for ISL, centrifugation-only enrichment, longer lifetime assumed for nuclear power plant (60 years instead of 40).

    But even if you double the amount, it's still the best or at least one of the best.

  • Has to be those frozen wind turbines and solar panels...
  • Really? Because they use the figure given by UNECE, that's a pretty good source I feel? The report it comes from is also very thorough.

    What sources have you seen that state a number 10 times higher? Would be interesting to see where the difference is and what numbers they give for other sources.

  • Artificial price increase so that you can post “discounts” on Prime Day
  • In the exact wording they speak of a "Trader". It's for both webshops and brick and mortar. And I think it applies to the entity and not the specific shop. So if a company has more than one shop, the lowest price on any of those shops would apply.

    Now this is new law and hasn't been fully tested, I'm sure shops will try things to evade this new regulation, but in the past the EU has not taken kindly to shit like that.

  • Artificial price increase so that you can post “discounts” on Prime Day
  • Also illegal in the EU, when posting a "sale" the price compared to must be the lowest price the outlet had for the product in the previous 30 days. So unless they want to increase the price for over 30 days, this trick isn't going to fly.

  • Has to be those frozen wind turbines and solar panels...
  • You are right, but in this specific chart, they don't include things like building the facilities, mining the materials etc. They just use the CO2 released whilst producing power, which with nuclear is very low. You can click on the chart and zoom in on the data, it's pretty cool. (This is wrong, see edit)

    The whole Germany situation is very complex and I was just jabbing, I live very close to Germany and work in Germany part of the time so I know something about it (but probably not everything). To me phasing out the nuclear wasn't that much of an issue, but it could have been done way slower to make sure renewables filled the gap. Buying gas from Russia with the war in Ukraine is going on permanently hurt my soul.

    Quickly phasing out nuclear is also a big middle finger to the countries in Europe that are looking to expand their nuclear power, but run up against long lead times. They would have gladly bought nuclear energy from Germany, which would mean way shorter lead times and prevent a lot of extra CO2 during construction of new facilities. Whilst building new big nuclear probably isn't useful in combatting climate change, getting the most out of existing nuclear would have been.

    The fuel coming from Russia isn't as big of a deal to me, as there are plenty of sources around the world to buy from. With the amount of gas we've bought from the US recently, we could have easily bought some nuclear fuel as well. Now all these sources have their issues, I don't like being beholden to the US and places like Niger or Namibia can have human rights issues.

    Obviously nuclear isn't the future and needs to be phased out, but in my mind this meant decades yet and not the rushed phasing out Germany did.

    Edit: Just checked the source, they actually do include things like mining of the fuel, construction of the facilities, transport of the fuel etc. into the CO2 calculation. Nuclear just blows everything out of the water in terms of CO2. Only renewables come close, but in terms of CO2 nuclear is the best.

  • Has to be those frozen wind turbines and solar panels...
  • Just to stir up some shit: France is green because they have a lot of nuclear power. Which means a lot of energy for basically zero CO2. Germany could have been green, but opted to shutdown their nuclear facilities in what can only be described as a "hurt themselves in confusion" move.

  • IT outage: banks, airlines and media hit by issues linked to Windows PCs
  • They are suffering from fallout because of media outlets like the one linked in this post that point the finger at Microsoft and Windows, but I feel this isn't really fair.

    If the kernel module Crowdstrike uses for Linux systems had failed everybody would rightfully point the finger at them for screwing up. But it probably wouldn't be news since their Linux solutions aren't as widespread as their Windows solutions are.

    If a Windows update would have caused this kind of thing, pointing the finger at Microsoft is justified. But Microsoft has many policies in place that prevent this kind of thing from happening. Their ring based rollout for Windows Updates pretty much exclude this kind of thing from happening.

  • IT outage: banks, airlines and media hit by issues linked to Windows PCs
  • 100% agreed, Crowdstrike fucked up with this one. I'm very interested to hear what went wrong. I assume they test their device drivers before deploying them to millions of customers, so something must have gone wrong between testing and deployment.

    Something like this simply cannot happen and this will cost them customers. Your reputation is everything in the security business, you trust you security provider to protect your systems. If the trust is gone, they are gone.

  • IT outage: banks, airlines and media hit by issues linked to Windows PCs
  • Agreed, but again these updates were done by the Crowdstrike software. Nothing to do with Microsoft or Windows.

    In this case it was an update to the security component which is specifically designed to protect against exploits on the endpoint. You'd want your security system to be up to date to protect as much as possible against new exploits. So updating this every day is a normal thing. In a corporate environment you do not want you end users to be able to block or postpone security updates.

    With Microsoft updates they get rolled out to different so called rings, which get bigger and bigger with each ring. This means every update is already in use by a smaller population, which reduces the chances of an update destroying the world like this greatly.

  • General Programming Discussion Thorry84

    Are microservices really the future?

    Serious question. I know there are a lot of memes about microservices, both advocating and against it. And jokes from devs who go and turn monoliths into microservices and then back again. For my line of work it isn't all that relevant, but a discussion I heard today made me wonder.

    There were two camps in this discussion. One side said microservices are the future, all big companies are moving towards it, the entire industry is moving towards it. In their view, if it wasn't Mach architecture, it wasn't valid software. In their world both software they made themselves and software bought or licensed (SaaS) externally should be all microservices, api first, cloud-native and headless. The other camp said it was foolish to think this is actually what's happening in the industry and depending on where you look microservices are actually abandoned instead of moving towards. By demanding all software to be like this you are limiting what there is on offer. Furthermore the total cost of operation would be higher and connecting everything together in a coherent way is a nightmare. Instead of gaining flexibility, one can actually lose flexibility because changing interfaces could be very hard or even impossible with software not fully under your own control. They argued a lot of the benefits are only slight or even nonexistent and not required in the current age of day.

    They asked what I thought and I had to confess I didn't really have an answer for them. I don't know what the industry is doing and I think whether or not to use microservices is highly dependent on the situation. I don't know if there is a universal answer.

    Do you guys have any good thoughts on this? Are microservices the future, or just a fad which needs to be forgotten ASAP.


    Just look at em, so cute!


    What's going on here? Wrong answers only



    Ivanova is always right. I will listen to Ivanova. Ivanova is God.


    A new community to steal from


    He is fully equipped


    Never forget the mantra of every big company out there


    The only reason it's Wednesday, is because we all agree it is


    Having an elf in battle is OP


    Imho the doctor is one sexy mf


    Girl talk


    Star Trek needs more cowbell


    Which rule of acquisition covers memes?


    Rip Tasha