What a crazy defect with such a high prevalence. That’s really pretty crazy

AMD has been really solid. I’ve built a number of PC’s and there’s I’ve never run into an issue with the CPU’s. the R5 2600, 3600, and R7 5800 and 5800x are all surprisingly efficient chips out of the box, but I played around with each and found even crazier undervolt settings. My server PC draws practically nothing except if there’s something using the (NVIDIA) GPU extensively (and even then it’s like, oh no, is it almost 75 watts? better call the fire brigade! lmao).

And obviously the R7 5800x is just a monster, although I’ve consistently seen that it runs hot but… I air cool mine and it’s never really going above 85c when under full load on stock, and if you play with undervolting at all it’s pretty easy to keep the exact same performance while lowering the total power delivered. Although I’ve found that it goes up to 85c still and the chip just runs faster…

Man I started getting nervous because I bought a bunch of parts to upgrade my partners PC. Couldn’t remember what Intel CPU I got cause I’m not as familiar with them.

12600KF, I’m safe phew.

On the topic, this is sad to hear because I’ve been waiting for the hat to drop on Intel’s turn-around. Moving to stateside manufacturing, the developments of some of the new tech that is available I’ve felt like they’re somewhat well poised to start shifting their lackluster goals and performance stagnation.

The news of this muddles that feeling a bit for me. Issues like this, especially if they are known beforehand and shipped out anyway, speak to a wider issue in the company.

Did these polls ask if they wanted Trump to drop out? Because I’m pretty sure most of us want that, too.

Seems like a simple check script for if at Google Meet then a red exclamation will appear saying you have it disabled and where to re-enable it.

My concept of self driving cars has always been external navigation from a grid.

An individual car self driving is useless for all of these reasons mentioned. However, a self driving car that is controlled as part of a wider grid? Now we’re talking. You input your destination and relative to everything currently on the road you are moved. If a wider issue like a meteor comes in, the grid goes down and traffic stops safely. If someone tries to game the system by standing in front of a car, the grid has control of the other vehicles as well. Some other benefits could be redesigning the use of tires for fewer microplastics, and there would have to weigh out the difference of gas vs. electricity costs. Ideally, each vehicle is powered by the grid so no more gas stations, but electricity comes from somewhere, so unless we move towards renewables then it may not have less emissions.

Obviously the drawback to this is the insane privacy imposition of the grid controlling where you go. The infrastructure would also be likely impossible as it would be the grid and the vehicles. But, if we were going to do it I feel like this would be on track towards the right way.

Now that I’m grown, I feel like a more feasible version of this is this sort of grid for local busses, as well as trucking and long-distance travel (aka trains) and getting local towns and cities to focus more on walkability. This works towards solving the problem of getting fewer vehicles on the road while not limiting people’s freedom to travel. Unfortunately it’s the same problem of infrastructure and no one will invest in this.

Why not meet in the middle and make it a toast.

"Do you want Google Meets to be disabled?

Y/N

Sounds great! We’ve disabled settings for Google Meet, if you would like to re-enable it at any point, you can find it at…"

There. I even wrote most of it out for them.

I graduated in 2013 and my first two years of highschool we lost our extracurricular classes, music and theater, which only came back in my senior year, so I definitely understand that. My class was on the cusp, as now schools bring in programs like the one I work with in order to teach them music and theater. It is not nearly the same as an actual course.

I think the examples you mention have been exacerbated by the changes made during Sec. Of Education’s Betsy DeVoss time, which some states have really shined to, so I think this is something that varies widely by region. California instituted few of the national policies outside of the leniencies on homeschooling curriculums, so so just like California in 2016, some states in 2020 are doing the same by igno, and these states that have weaker support for education have suffered immensely. I cannot even imagine what the landscape looks like in Arizona, Texas, the Carolina’s/Dakota’s, Florida.

In that regard I definitely don’t disagree, but I’ve noticed that our current Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona, the pushes have been trying to make public schools more able to deal with the problems they have on their own - here’s money set aside, here’s better Internet for your schools… Meanwhile, Ron DeSantis just cut funding for arts programs entirely in Florida.

So if the states don’t want the help and avoid the wider national policies put in place to help them, I really have to wonder how much of it is regional microcosms that are actively trying to impede on the public education system from being effective. Or rather, a branch of our government that doesn’t want to educate people. To that end, I don’t think the education system should be dismantled and I don’t think the original commenter necessarily does either. It’s clearly flawed since not even 2 different states, but 2 different local counties have wildly different experiences, just based on the county’s school board and how rich the area may happen to be.

From personal experience, John F. Kennedy high school, or “Jail For Kids”, in my freshman year I witnessed our senior class try and join the U.C. Berkeley College walkouts, which resulted in a student getting tased when an altercation between a student and an officer happened resulting in a stampede, which the tasing prevented. I mentioned the lockdowns, but not that it wasn’t entirely uncommon for them to last over 2 hours after the end of the day, but we couldn’t leave due to safety concerns. My sophomore year we had metal detectors installed at the entrance (due to students bringing guns on campus). So I definitely understand how easily it has shifted into what you’re talking about with your partners experience.

I just wonder how much of the changes are in areas where education isn’t something that matters to the politicians making the local policy. I know for a fact that some areas are unaffected entirely, my friends ritzy high school in Malibu and my local highschool in Orinda for rich white students are still making kids doctors and senators both in the top 400 schools in the U.S.

I don’t know what solution there is, other than making all aspects of education the most imperative factor to the success of the U.S. Clearly that’s not of interest, but I can’t trust homeschooling either because of how heavily co-opted it has become by the anti-vax/alt right crowd, and that every homeschooled child I worked with in California were not on the same level as their peers and didn’t have basic foundations – high schoolers who are struggling with sentence structure.

And I know literacy has become an even more widespread issue through and post-covid, but if homeschooling is the answer to combat it and the students I’ve met are even further behind… Granted, I’m just one person in one area and I don’t expect this to be how it is everywhere, but anytime I hear about it online, the people working with homeschooled children say they’re struggling and the people trying to homeschool their kids are complaining about the state requirements. It just doesn’t give me a lot of hope.

Anyway, I went on a bit of a tangent. I agree with your last sentence entirely, I’ve just also seen the damage that not caring about phones in class has had on the students. Post Covid screen dependency is an ongoing symptom of a wider issue though, and I agree that restriction of them at all isn’t the solution.

My personal stance has always been accountability to the individual, so if you’re using it in class for work then I’m fine with it. That means, using it when it’s appropriate and practicing self control/focus by limiting what you do on the device. This inherently forces the students to not have it at specific times, while encouraging using all the tools at their disposal. And if a student is playing around on their phone, I ask them to leave the class or write their notes by hand for the rest of it.

It’s okay to get bored or get distracted, and it’s okay for a teacher to set a reasonable boundary. We are an outside program, so the students 97% of the time want to be there and a majority of the time have no reason to be on their phone in the first place (are you really going to be texting while dancing, acting, or playing an instrument?). But full on authoritarianism is never the way, it’s frustrating that it’s like… the go to solution instead of doing the work to figure out what needs to be changed.

I’d want to be a spaghetti but I’d probably be a penne.

I’ll recommend you to the author Henry James. He’s a romantic, and much of his way of writing is beautifully easy to digest, with clear reason and intent behind why he writes.

He is an author who lived from 1843 to 1916, which is right around when our current English language stopped evolving so quickly. So much of what you will read from him is applicable to the English language of today (as opposed to other great authors from earlier, such as Laurence Sterne, where the language is understandable but many nuances have evolved). I suppose I should also mention John Milton and E.M. Forester as verbose but easy to understand authors.

When you’re learning, don’t be afraid to read slowly. Note the way in which articles (a, the) are used. For example, the importance of an object can be established whether it is the piece, or whether it is a piece. To this example, James Joyce has a novel, “A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man”. It is just a portrait, but it is of the man.

There’s a fine line between being allowed to have your phone in school and mitigating its usage. I don’t entirely disagree with you, but I do think you’re being a bit too… Strong, about your stance.

When I was in middle school, phones were banned through and through. Weren’t allowed to be on, weren’t allowed out, etc. One day I think at lunch period, I was digging through my backpack while walking and the phone flew out of the bag. It was confiscated by the jerk volunteer and given to the principal, and I had to get it with my parents after school. It’s was embarrassing and I knew it was wrong because I had done nothing wrong. This fits to your point.

Everyone involved with a rational mind knew it was bullshit. However, this was also the same school that had major issues with gang violence. We had a (pretty reasonable) dress code policy that involved no local gang colors - no red, no blue, no purple. Phone were banned because there had been a driveby shooting that was called in by a gang affiliated student who got into an argument. From their perspective, they wanted to take no chances from insane 11-13 year olds who were already smoking weed and active in gangs.

I grew up in the ghetto where school is the only opportunity for people to get out of a terrible situation. My high schools graduating class was the first to have reached over 74% graduation rate in over a decade. This school (literally nicknamed Jail For Kids), had actual students with probation officers. We had multiple lockdowns monthly, almost all of which were due to people with weapons and police activity nearby.

The point I’m getting at is that, to an extent, schools absolutely mold and shape the status quo. However, it’s completely wrong to make the assumption that all schools feed into the prison industrial complex. In my area, school was the one chance a kid who grew up slinging had to get out, and for many in my class it was.

I agree with you that schools have a number of issues, but from what I’ve read here today I don’t entirely agree about your stance, from having grown up in and worked with schools like this as an adult. And to get back on topic, students not being allowed to use their phones during class is not a bad thing. During lunchtime, I agree a ban is too much, however I can also understand wanting to keep students socialized with each other. That 30 minutes during lunch doesn’t need to be spent on your phone, when you have the rest of your day at home to do so.

After Covid, in my area, this dynamic changed entirely. By the time I came back from college and started working, kids weren’t involved in that anymore. Middle school was completely normal, kids weren’t affiliated with gangs, had no idea what weed was, let alone the other stuff. But the one thing they all had in common was the debilitating addiction to their phone. You can’t go 5 minutes without seeing a child smashing their finger on the screen, in classes, during lunch, after school, on the bus. Just walking around with their eyes glued to their phone.

And I get it, I’ve been a screen kid too. I’ve always loved tech and games, still spend way too much time on it. But as a kid we had more options, our entire lives weren’t spent engaging through the phone, whereas now that is how you have to engage with others. When we had playtime growing up, only a portion of it was spent on the PlayStation and a majority of the rest was imagination and exploring. Then when we were done, I’d explore the Internet on a laptop with Neopets, Gamefaqs, or Gaia Online.

To me, it seems that the intent is pretty obvious. Students have had a really difficult time being properly engaged in school due to how poor quality the level of schooling had become from the changes after 2016 that were made from the Secretary of Education, then further floundered through Covid. When schools came back into session, the level of dependency to phones has grown exponentially, and these students abilities to go without have been shortened drastically.

If the one common trend among all these students is that poor support during a critical period of education led to the overabundance of cell phone dependence, doesn’t it make sense to consider banning it, to at least try and see if it results in a positive change?

From what I’ve read from you, it seems like the answer would be no, because it’s taking away the freedom. Which, sure. But shouldn’t we also make as many efforts as possible to prepare our students? If the options are 1) teach people or 2) let them ignore it and spend all their time doing nothing, wouldn’t we choose to avoid option 2?

The way I have experienced it, we need to allow for healthy technological exploration while encouraging the focus on school studies. Right now, I’m honestly more on the side FOR banning phones from schools because I’ve seen firsthand the way students use them. When I was in highschool, it was common for people to put in headphones and ignore the teacher, and it was common for the teacher to put them on blast for it. When I go to do my job at the schools, it is a majority of the students using headphones or their phone during class to ignore the teacher. The teachers can’t do anything about it, the parents don’t care, and so what options are left? We just let our youth grow up going to school for 12 years ignoring every part of it?

That’s a recipe for disaster. We’re already seeing the effects of this with Gen Z entering the workplace (and I don’t mean your standard retail or 9-5, I work in performing arts) and while many have been beyond amazing, there are a few who clearly are struggling. I worry this will be the case as more younger generations begin trying to navigate their career choices. As I said at the beginning, there is a clear line between trying to motivate the usage of phones in spaces where their presence isn’t needed, and outright controlling people. In my opinion, mitigating cell phone usage in students isn’t an attempt at control. It’s an attempt at giving students a chance to thrive.

Btw: I definitely think we should adjust curriculums to allow for more engaging education. For some odd reason, the usage of cell phones in certain classes is way, way down. For example, yearbook, art, music, and digitally related classes (hardware/software) almost none of the students pull out their phone during class. Almost as if having students engaged in something they are interested in is a way to mitigate them using their phones to entertain themselves. I can’t imagine why. (/////S)

Instead we are seeing further funding cuts to these programs, so that’s great…

Tl;Dr I don’t disagree, but I also do.

Whatever you do, think about what you read from the perspective of bettering the lives of people. If the policy or the people are saying things that come off as hateful or prejudiced, maybe that’s what they’re trying to accomplish.

Unrelated: I had a temporary bout of dyslexia and read, “Dr. Drew on the biggest threats to FOSS” and got quite confused for just a moment.

This is pretty much the only way that I use AI. It can brainstorm 50 ideas faster than I can and format them in a way that I can actually get started on projects rather than planning out each step.

AI is pretty strong at what I have been calling “permanent facts”. Using any song as an example, it will always have the same key, tempo, scales, etc. As such, when asking for details about a song, listing out the key, scales, tempo, and asking it to show unconventional scales that will play over it. Another example of a permanent fact would be the death date of someone, as that isn’t really going to be changing.

On the other hand, temporary facts are where hallucination and other inaccuracies come in. There’s no way for LLM’s to get new information, so it doesn’t know about career changes, current ages or net worth. You can utilize permanent facts to get accurate information about temporary facts, but that’s not nearly as useful. I think one of the major issues people have with LLM’s (model creation aside) is that our society really values temporary facts, and so when it gets it wrong people like to point at that as a fault. Which it certainly is, but to me it’s kind of like pointing at Photoshop and laughing that it can’t even be used to write a book - like, OK but that’s not really it’s purpose?

I think another example of LLM’s definitely being useful was all of those privacy nightmare Excel/Sheets plugins. Privacy aside, that’s basically the ideal use-case for LLM’s as you are pointing out Permanent Facts (the data in cells A-Z) and having it sort them in some fashion. I’ve seen a lot of LLM hallucinations for sure, but I’ve also seen a lot of consistency when actually using it as intended. I’ve yet to have it be “wrong” when I was testing my music information template or when sorting out data in excel.

Much outside of that though, no. It’s only useful as getting mass amounts of theory in a short session, not so much for being reliable in that information. That might sound like a bad tool, but as mentioned it has plenty of use-cases, people are just using it as a tool very, very poorly. (It can also be used maliciously more easily than most other tools, which definitely prohibits its status as a “good” tool.)

I more meant in the case of someone whose life was cut short and didn’t have the time to put something like this together. I agree that ideally this is information you’d get to pass down, but life doesn’t always work out like that.

Also like you said about the AI powered app, it’s only a matter of time before Adobe Historical Life comes out and we’re paying $90 a month for gramma’s recipes (stories are an additional subscription).

Typical lack of direction

This makes me wonder, what is the difference in the environmental cost of uploading/downloading this data vs. shipping a USB.

I would guess that shipping emissions would be higher than digital ones, but I don’t have any basis for that theory. (I’m just curious, not trying to say or imply anything here)

Yeah contrary to all the negativity about this in this thread, I think there’s a lot of worthwhile reasons for this that aren’t centered on fawning over the loss of a love one. Think of how many family recipes could be preserved. Think of the stories that you can be retold in 10 years. Think of the little things that you’d easily forget as time passes. These are all ways of keeping someone with us without making their death the main focus.

Yes, death and moving on are a part of life, we also always say to keep people alive in our hearts. I think there are plenty of ways to keep people around us alive without having them present, I don’t think an AI version of someone is inherently keeping your spirit from continuing on, nor is it inherently keeping your loved one from living in the moment.

Also I can’t help but think of the Star Trek computer but with this. When I was young I had a close gaming friend who we lost too soon, he was very much an announcer personality. He would have been perfect for being my voice assistant, and would have thought it to be hilarious.

Anyway, I definitely see plenty of downsides, don’t get me wrong. The potential for someone to wallow with this is high. I also think there’s quite a few upsides as mentioned – they aren’t ephemeral, but I think it’s somewhat fair to pick and choose good memories to pass down to remember. Quite a few old philosophical advents coming to fruition with tech these days.

This is true for stone and fossils, would this also be the case for crystal? I’m under the impression that their chain is pretty much set in stone (pun not intended), to the point where longevity would mostly be risked by cracking damage. Similar to how we see the striations of lightning strikes.

Could also definitely be survivorship though!

I really do wonder why it’s taking so long for stone-striation storage to be a thing. We have proof that data will surpass 150m years through fossils, so why the heck did we think that flash storage was a good idea!