It turns out that “Women Who Code Closing - Women Who Code” actually isn’t about Women that code a software called “Closing”, and Women that code in general.
In fact, what they meant to write was:
The End of an Era: “Women Who Code” Closing – Women Who Code.
I know I’m gonna get downvoted for this, but punctuation matters, and sadly, it has to be said. So here I go.
Maybe they mean it in the sense of “forgery”. You know, as in “let people imagine what it is like to have friendships, by letting them make forgeries of their lives, but with friends in it” 🤪
Fuck yea!
Damn, now I want part 2!! 😶
(Thanks for posting!! 🙏)
I think we can all agree on that… But without the entire article, one can only parametrise their answer… I was hoping someone with a full version could do an HTML dump. 😅
Or at the very least a markdown dump in here.
Is it using XLR?
Is it just me, or is everyone here commenting on a half article, the other half being behind a paywall? 😬
I think you’re overstating the compute power […]
I don’t actually think so. A100 GPUs in server chassis have a 400 or 500W TDP depending on the configuration, and even if I’m assuming 400, with 4 per watercooled 1U chassis, a 47U rack with those would consume about 100kW with power supply efficiency and whatnot.
Running those for a day only would be 2.4GWh.
Now, I’m not assuming Amazon would own 100s of those racks at every DC, but they probably would use at least a couple of such racks to train their model (time is money, right?). And training them for a week with just two of those would be 35GWh, and I can only extrapolate from there.
So I don’t think that going to TWh is such an overstatement.
[…] and understating the amount of cardboard Amazon uses
That, very possibly.
I have seldom used Amazon ever, maybe 5 times tops, and I can only remember two times. Those two times, I ordered a smartphone and a bunch of electronics supplies, and I don’t remember the packaging being excessive. But I know from plenty of memes that they regularly overdo it. That, coupled with the insane amount of shit people order online… And yes, I believe you are right on that one.
Even so, as long as it is cardboard, or paper, and not plastic and glue, it isn’t a big ecological issue.
However, that makes no difference to Amazon financially, cost is cost, and they only care about that.
But let’s not pretend they are doing a good thing then. It is a cost effective measure for them, that ends up worsening the situation for everyone else, because the tradeoff is good economically, and terrible ecologically.
If they wanted to do a good thing, they could use machine learning to optimise the combining of deliveries in the same area, to save on petrol, and by extension, pollution from their vehicles, but that would actually worsen the customer experience, and end up costing them more than it would save them, so that’s never gonna happen.
IMHO the issue is two folds:
Yeah, it is one of the least bad uses for it.
But then again, using literal tera-watts-hours of compute power to save on the easiest actually recyclable material known to man (cardboard), maybe that’s just me, maybe I’m too jaded, but it sounds like a pretty bad overall outcome.
It isn’t a bad deal for Amazon, tho, who is likely to save on costs, that way, since energy is still orders of magnitude cheaper than it should be[1], and cardboard is getting pricier.
if we were to account for the available supply, the demand, and the future (think sooner than later) need for transition towards new energy sources… Some that simply do not have the same potential. ↩︎
The thing is, devops is pretty complex and pretty diverse. You’ve got at least 6 different solutions among the popular ones.
Last time I checked only the list of available provisioning software, I counted 22.
Sure, some like cdist are pretty niche, but still, when you apply for a company, even tho it is going to either be AWS (mostly), azure, GCE, oracle, or some run of the mill VPS provider with extended cloud features (simili S3 based on minio, “cloud LAN”, etc), and you are likely going to use terraform for host provisioning, the most relevant information to check is which software they use. Packer? Or dynamic provisioning like Chef? Puppet? Ansible? Salt? Or one of the “lesser ones”?
And thing is, even among successive versions, among compatible stacks, the DSL evolved, and the way things are supposed to be done changed. For example, before hiera, puppet was an entirely different beast.
And that’s not even throwing docker or (or rkt, appc) in the mix. Then you have k8s, podman, helm, etc.
The entire ecosystem has considerable overlap too.
So, on one hand, you have pretty clean and useable code snippets on stackoverflow, github gist, etc. So much so that tools like that emerged… And then, the very second LLMs were able to produce any moderately usable output, they were trained on that data.
And on the other hand, you have devops. An ecosystem with no clear boundaries, no clear organisation, not much maturity yet (in spite of the industry being more than a decade old), and so organic that keeping up with developments is a full time job on its own. There’s no chance in hell LLMs can be properly trained on that dataset before it cools down. Not a chance. Never gonna happen.
Do bullets kill soldiers?
Infantry soldiers in the open, possibly. Soldiers in an APC? No.
Same applies to companies. A single sufficient bad review on a small, one-person company can take it out entirely. A single review of a big corporation? Not even one from a big shot like MKBHD.
This headline is dumb.
I believe you’re missing the actual causality chain here.
While it is actually proven that vendors will degrade your experience artificially to “motivate” you to buy new devices, in the never ending pursuit of monetary gain, there is no such potential incentive here: you aren’t paying for new drivers.
And while others suggest biases, I do believe you are witnessing an effect that is at least partially real, if not totally, but not for the reasons you believe:
Most programs that leverage GPUs end up being GPU bottlenecked. Meaning that one can almost always improve the program’s performance by using a better GPU.
But then, why does a new driver not improve performance, and rather, simply “bring a degraded performance back to previous levels”?
Well, that has to do with auto-updates, and the way drivers are distributed.
While, in a world where one would have to manually update everything, a new driver would almost certainly mean better performance for a given program, most programs in our world auto-update automatically (and sometimes even, silently). And the developers are usually on top of things wrt drivers, because they follow drivers updates closely, get early versions, etc.
Meaning that when a driver is updated, your apps usually are, too. In a way that leverage the new driver for more processing, rather than faster processing. But unlike your automatically updated apps, your drivers are updated manually.
And the consequence of such updates, when you are too slow to update your drivers, is a degraded experience.
Not because anyone artificially throttled your device’s performance, but because you lag too much behind expected updates.
Thumb_nail.jpg
Oh. Yes, that makes sense. I read it too literally I suppose (“better to test” as in “better to give it a try”, while “better to try it first” was meant). 🤪 thank you! 🙏
Thank you very much for this post. I’m glad someone did the effort of getting some of those and presenting them from the PoV of a first time experience. I was curious.
However, I’m not sure what you meant with:
BUT when I shared it with others, people in body reported less effectiveness due to thickness of skin and under-dermal stuff, so it’s better to test it if you aren’t skinny as a skeleton.
At first it sounds like you say that overweight people have trouble using them (which is logical, the device needs to touch the bones), but then you go on saying that it doesn’t work for underweight people? I’m confused. Could you please elaborate a little? Thanks 🙂
I’m not one for labeling music in genres, so I’ll write my answer in two parts: the “canonical” information, with artists documented as “IDM” artists on Wikipedia, and the “personal” information, which I think fits the so called “IDM” genre, but don’t quote me on that, I wouldn’t really know. This is “best effort”.
Canonical answer:
Orbital, aphex twin, and boards of Canada come to mind, but that’s more for the curious casual reader of this thread, as I’m sure you already know them. Also John Tejada, Carbon Based Lifeforms, Moderat, which are less known.
Personal answer:
I dunno if I would say that they fit in “IDM”, but I really enjoy the music of the artist Siriusmo. Also (in no particular order, all this could be hit or miss for you, so don’t dismiss it all because you don’t like one) Sasha, Kaito, Ernest Saint Laurent, Vessels, Barker & Baumecker, and pretty much everything under the labels monkeytown and Kompakt (respectively based in Berlin and Koln). I’m not sure where the genre lines stop tho, so you might add Nick Warren, Phil k, Dave seaman, John Digweed, etc. to that. Labels renaissance (the British one) and Global Underground.
deleted by creator
Hi! Great post, good research with sources, great initiative, thank you. 🙏