Not quite, they built Slack as an internal communication tool while building the game Glitch (RIP) and after the game failed they decided to productize Slack.

> machines will achieve human level output at some point

Would you care to put some sort of time scale to "at some point?" Are we talking about months, years, decades, centuries?

No real idea. It is also a very difficult thing to measure. But I think once we see it, the argument will be over.

Wild guess, within 30 years.

Fun fact: For now, adding a boolean search term like -blahblahblah will skip the AI result and just show web results.

Fun Guideline story: I worked for a company that went bankrupt and used guideline for 401k. The first day the website allowed me I withdrew the balance for rollover. Apparently this should not have been possible before the bankruptcy was finalized. I found from court filings that the bankruptcy trustee kept telling Guideline they need to freeze withdrawals until the bankruptcy was finalized, and Guideline kept dragging their feet and acting like they didn't understand. The trustee ended up having to go to court and get a temporary restraining order to prevent more employees from withdrawing their balances before the bankruptcy was finalized.

Un-fun bankruptcy fact: All employee names & mailing addresses are part of the public record and accessible on PACER because they're potential creditors in the bankruptcy.

Wait, how are 401ks part of a bankruptcy? I guess the matching portion?

Edit: from my quick research, it appears 401ks are completely protected in a bankruptcy. The only thing would be if the company had not yet sent your contribution to the servicer, then that payment would be considered another creditor. But if the money is in your 401k account at your servicer, the money is protected from any bankruptcy.

I worked for a company that went bankrupt. They ended up taking several thousand dollars out of my account to cover IIRC unpaid fees to the provider.

Not even corner cases. I worked for a fintech that launched a dda-ish product that had 16 digit account numbers, issued sequentially, with no check digits. At launch there didn't seem to be a CS process for dealing with pretty obvious "customer mistyped account number and sent their money to some else's account." problem.

Feature parity with blockchains.

Not even, in cases where the company couldn't recover funds from misdirected payments they ate the loss. Though obviously I think that's a good thing.

Uh, no, most crypto wallet addresses have either a checksum or some other means of typo detection / prevention.

I think the high-density data centers that are being built to support the hyperscalers are more analogous to the dark fiber overbuild. When you lit that fiber in 2015, you (presumably) were not using a line card bought back in 1998.

Everything in that data center is depreciating as soon as they turn on the power.

AC, ups, generators not to mention the severs.

That's the thing with fiber it was still useful. The cards at either end are easy to add, waaaayyy cheaper and higher perf (they're were no cards on end of dark lines) 15 years later.

So this will force datacenters that employ "reliability theater" to either actually be reliable or give up the facade and take repeated outages?

Ok!

Maybe the "wagyu" chili with a big 'ol squirt of nacho cheeze sauce?

Google was kind enough to give the AI overview a stable CSS class name (to date), so this userscript has been effective at hiding it for me:

window.addEventListener('load', function() { var things = this.document.getElementsByClassName('M8OgIe'); for (var thing of things) { thing.style.display = 'none'; } }, false);

Democrats see government differently than Republicans.

I would be even more specific and say that Lina Khan sees government differently than most Republicans and Democrats.

I agree, though I think it is worth giving some credit to the people who chose her & appointed her. They didn't have to do that. It was one of the more impressive moves by the previous admin, and won them a lot of points from me.

Well yes, I agree. But GP was saying "government" writ large behaves XYZ.

Which absolutely does not imply a monolith of people all working in perfect lock step.

It seems like you're looking to fight on the internet - would you consider a different activity instead?

> It's absurd if you believe the point of government is to be by, for, and of the people. > If you see government as a way to enhance the ability of the owner class to enrich themselves, it makes perfect sense.

No I actually think it's important for people to square views like "government is a way to enrich the owner class" with actual reality, such as the fact that the government when administered by a different party did the exact opposite.