I can imagine why they redact the reports so much: Elon hating NGOs would gladly pay a lawyer to spend as much time suing Tesla for each crash, even if completely frivolously and with no hope of recouping any of the time and money spent, and think they were doing the great work of social justice.
I use Jenkins every single day, and have been using it my entire career through three different companies self hosting it.
Please tell me how we somehow have been hobbled despite having simple and clear pipelines setup that autobuild any branch we want and allow one click deploys to our preprod environment and automatically manage versioning and scalably handle load from "Literally zero" to "Everyone in the company wants to rebuild everything now" and goes down less than github.
What are we supposedly missing?
More importantly, what are we missing that tangibly improves results for our consumers?
Working with Jenkins CasC, JobDSL and declarative pipelines, I'm not sure where the million times comes from. Sure, there are some annoying parts, and GHA has the social network for reusable actions, but apart from that it's not that different.
Oldschool maven type jobs where you type shell script into a `<textarea>`? Yeah, let's not talk about those, but we don't have a single one left anymore.
That also is/was awful. But it's just another platform like GHA, and the solution to this kind of thing is always the same, should not be surprising, and is boring in the good way. Write automation so that it's not tightly coupled to the platform on the backend. If you can't migrate between platforms then you're eventually going to be unhappy.
If someone is forcing you towards high stakes tight-coupling with no thought whatsoever towards the lock-in, you should get it in writing that "we at ${org} are fully committed to ${vendor} with ${platform}, on ${cloud} using ${tech} come what may, now and forever" and lots of sign off so that everyone knows who to blame when this is inevitably wrong.
You should read F.A Hayek's essay on The Paradox of Savings [1]. Creation of capital like factories, education creating new specialists, or new processes lowers the cost of production and leads to real economic progress. Excessive spending without capital creation does nothing except keeping factors of production wastefully employed when they could be put to other uses and always ends in inflation.
Wait till the robots arrive. That they will know how to do a vast range of human skills, some that people train their whole lives for, will surprise people the most. The future shock I get from Claude Code, knowing how long stuff takes the hard way, especially niche difficult to research topics like the alternate applicable designs of deep learning models to a modeling task, is a thing of wonder. Imagine now that a master marble carver shows up at an exhibition and some sci-fi author just had robots make a perfect beautiful equivalent of a character from his novel, equivalent in quality to Michaelangelo's David, but cyberpunk.
What you are witnessing is the process of "mystification" where it requires an "expert" annointed by some organization to interpret arbitrary criteria to make a politically or economically important determination that can't really be challenged on any objective basis. Since you are not an "expert", you are not permitted to do your own research and therefore by rule are incapable of being able to access the special mystified knowledge that only the "expert" has access to.
If no outsider can't explain why the expert is right and the non-expert is wrong, besides saying they're not an expert, then it certainly has the appearance of being a mystical power of the expert. After all, mysticism requires only faith in the mystic prophet to be true.
I posit that the effectiveness of your propaganda is proportional to the percentage of attention bandwidth that your campaign occupies in the minds of people. If you as an individual can drive the same # impressions as Mr. Beast can, then you're going to be persuasive whatever your message is. But most individuals can't achieve Mr. Beast levels of popularity, so they aren't going to be persuasive. Nation states, on the other hand, have the compute resources and patience to occupy a lot of bandwidth, even if no single sockpuppet account they control is that popular.
> Nation states, on the other hand, have the compute resources and patience to occupy a lot of bandwidth, even if no single sockpuppet account they control is that popular.
If you control the platform where people go, you can easily launder popularity by promoting few persons to the top and pushing the unwanted entities into the blackhole of feeds/bans while hiding behind inconsistent community guidelines, algorithmic feeds and shadow bans.
I just asked AI what the thousands of arrests for social media posts so far are for and it didn't say anti-semetic content. It said it's largely targeted at anti-immigrant, gender-critical, and being mean to politicians comments. Israel is the "woke right" line these days though, and something the "woke left" and "woke right" can both agree on hating.
Please stop doing this. If someone wants to read LLM-generated hooey of some variety, they can submit a prompt somewhere and read the resulting text themselves.
Well I could do a web search and read all the thousands of articles about social media censorship in Britian and write an essay on it with grammar errors, or I could go on here and blame Israel like the OP, because that's just what I'm feeling today and I saw a bunch of stuff while TikTok doomscrolling yesterday that made me believe that. You'd say the articles I quoted that didn't say Israel were not from reliable sources, and absolutely nobody's mind would be changed. I'll trust AI to be more objective about doing the research. However, I did write the comment myself. I mean I would go back and edit it and put in random no-no words for AI, just to prove that, but I'd get flagged.
The glitchy stuff in the model reasoning is likely to come from the constant redefinition of words that communists and other ideologues like to engage in. For example "People's Democratic Republic of Korea."
I've read political books from the 70s. Nothing has changed at all in politics since then. Just what was going on in San Francisco at the time took over the whole country.
The last big change was the death of Stalin. He was a genuine threat to the world order being so incredibly capable and ruthless. After that things settled back into the current long slide to "the end of history." Xi's China seems to be opening up a new era of great power conflicts.
The Israelis and the Palestinians have been doing awful shit to each other for 80 years. All the arguments are the same as 50 years ago. Little has changed. Boring.
reply