Spyke

Replies

Comment on

AI bubble update: 79% of companies say their GPUs sit idle at least half the time, yet most plan new AI platforms

Reply in thread

The GPUs they're talking about don't have video outputs, and I think many of them aren't even PCIe. Even at pennies on the dollar, they'll still be hundreds of dollars, so way easier just to get a consumer card.

All the past infrastructure bubbles, the companies that inevitably failed at least left some usable infrastructure - rails, pipelines, dark fiber... These guys are going to crash, never pay back their loans, and the acres of datacenter, containers of GPUs, and racks of servers are just going to get recycled. It's such shocking waste that it's hard to comprehend.

Comment on

For users with public facing services: How does the current explosion of AI-discovered vulnerabilities affect your threat model and willingness to be public facing?

Reply in thread

It's really not the publicly disclosed vulnerabilities you need to worry about. Most of those vulnerabilities have existed for years - the recent php thing is supposedly 12 years old. Maybe someone's been out there exploiting it for 12 years.

The people who have sought and exploited vulnerabilities since computers went online don't disclose what they find. They are the people who should be most worried about AI-assisted vulnerability research, because it directly attacks their business model.

Comment on

Alito wasn’t bluffing: He believes the Supreme Court is above the law

Reply in thread

One national election every four years is enough for me. I can't even imagine what the campaigns for judges with the power to rewrite the Constitution through creative interpretation would look like, but if they can put Trump in the White House, they could put him on the Supreme Court.

Term limits. Active oversight. Maybe go back to requiring 60+ votes to confirm so the GOP can't shove the Federalist Society hack-of-the-day through with a simple majority.

Comment on

Thousands of CEOs admit AI had no impact on employment or productivity

I feel like the big mistake they continue to propagate is failing to distinguish among the uses of AI.

A lot of hype seems to be the generative uses, where AI creates code, images, text, or whatever, or the agentic uses where it supposedly automates some process. Safe uses in that way should involve human review and approval, and if the human spends as much time reviewing as they would creating it in the first place, then there's a productivity loss.

All the positive cases I've heard of use AI like a fancy search engine - look for specific issues in a large code base, look for internal consistency in large document or document sets. That form lets the human shift from reading hundreds or thousands of pages to reading whatever snippets the AI returns. Even if that's a lot of false positives, it's still a big savings over full review. And as long as the AI's false-negative rate is better than the human, it's a net improvement in review.

And, of course, there's the possibility that AI facilitated review allows companies to do review of documents that they would otherwise have ignored as intractable, which would also show up as reduced productivity.

Comment on

Discomfort with modern technology shapes Gen Z's desire to live in the past

Reply in thread

Don't even get me started on the 1990s. Every new processor generation actually felt faster. Web pages had blinking banners because the creator thought it looked cool, not to advertise a personal information vacuum. There was no better introduction to the public's absolutely awful sense of style. But I went from talking to international friends for $0.50/minute to free, and it was amazing.