Since LLMs emulate human writing, what is it about that sentence that gives away that it was written by an LLM rather than human? Haven't we seen plenty of hollow-sounding self-aggrandizing marketing copies like this one pre-LLMs? What is it that is wrong with this sentence?
It sounds like corporate meaningless drivel. Everyone is dogging on it because it's no different than when startups of yore would say "making the world a better place." As if the meaningless platitude was some incantation you had to whisper or the funding wouldn't close.
Would that be odd? AI companies are still staffed by people, and large announcements like acquihires certainly feel like they could use a slightly more human touch if they truly mean a lot to the company.
Eh if anyone is all in on AI and it replacing human writing it would be an AI company
But then that means if you're a PR or communications person working at this startup (or at Meta?) your job is not secure and that your days there are probably numbered, which I'm sure is great for morale...
For anyone reading that wasn't around it was very much an irrational hysteria. The bigots latched on to it to spread fear and justify their dehumanization of gay people. There were people that tried to bring reason and science to the conversation but they were drowned out by the panic/bigotry.
There was no good reason for the AIDS phobia in the 80s.
I knew as I wrote that someone would feel compelled to respond. Too late to unwind.
It’s only in hindsight and it wasn’t just bigots. Safer sex as we know it today was directly from the AIDS scare.
AIDS was no less than a death sentence. It was incurable, untreatable, and the cancer after-effects were pretty nasty. Broad research and public transparency took a long time to take hold and that left regular people speculating for years.
Even medical doctors turned away suspected AIDs patients, because everyone was pretty scared.
For a bit, even as a kid I remember it being on par or scarier than nuclear war because so much was unknown.
Assuming you are Mormon, is home schooling sort of another form of virtue signaling Mormon families employ or is it more of a way to ensure your families don't get excluded? Like, did you really have a choice in the matter once you realized you either go full Mormon or leave the church entirely?
Mormons aren't the only people with large families. Ultra-conservative Jews, Muslims, and many Christians have large families. What I don't think I've ever seen is a couple who is non-religious or atheist and has a large family.
Protestant Christian and most of my Christian brothers and sisters look at how many kids I have and that we homeschool and think I'm a little crazy (just like most non-Christians). I'd say probably 1/3 of the families in our church homeschool though. It's a wonderful community to be a part of and if I sent my remaining kids to public school, I wouldn't be asked to leave.
I'll take the L but it still sorta maps to where I was going with the Mormon angle.
I've been around Mormons, not a religion scholar, but it seems plausible to me the same "one upsmanship" mormons have with missions, large paternalistic families, avoiding "outsiders" (see: homeschooling), etc are common in other religious communities. Like maybe the protestant Christian one you are in?
The first thing I ever wrote that other people used was a j2me app freshman year in college. It was a power hour app that played a random simpsons .wav every minute.
I was a pretty poor CS student, in hindsight I'm surprised I got it to work.
One of the very first "hacks" I did was finding instructions via a random WAP website on how to patch a J2ME game for some early phone that could run .jar games, in order to effectively crack it.
Donald Trump Jr. was appointed to the advisory board of a small, Florida-based drone component company called Unusual Machines in November 2024. [1] He is also an investor in the company and holds a significant financial stake (reported to be worth around $4 million). Following his appointment, the company's stock price experienced a sharp increase. [2] In October 2025, the company announced it had secured a contract with the U.S. Army to supply drone motors and other components, described by the CEO as their largest-ever U.S. government order. The Army also signaled plans for a possible follow-on order for additional components in 2026.
Horrible as it sounds, that may explain the plan to buy drones instead of a plan to spin up the manufacturing capacity to make millions of drones.
But also we need to look at it from the perspective of leaders as well. You want to spin up manufacturing capacity so you roll out policies to do that and what happens in a republic? Every leader demands the manufacturing be in their district/state. No matter how ill suited that district/state is to that manufacturing. Political considerations become the driving factor as opposed to ability, resiliency and sustainability.
So sometimes just providing demand side of a market can spin up manufacturing without having to wade into all that nonsense. And believe me, it would be nonsense.
So the double fail of their brazen corruption could inadvertently end up being a positive long term in this particular instance. Like multiplying two negative numbers.
Having worked in a hyper scaler on a system to orchestrate hw breakfix, it requires a lot of hands.
We replaced thousands of hard drives alone per day...
And racks are constantly coming and going. Hyperscaler DCs are busy places.
>but not compared to similar businesses of their capital value
So? it's not like if hyperscalers weren't building datacenters, the billions that would otherwise be spent on GPUs would be spent on 10 car factories or whatever. The only reason the billions was being invested in the first place was because there's a craze for AI datacenters
This is good first hand information. If you had a guess, how much did these people make per hour? Someone who (1) locates a physical server (amoungst thousands) and (2) replaces a hard drive has roughly the same skillset as someone stocking supermarket shelves in 2025. I guess then make max 20 USD per hour.
FD: I work at Amazon, I also started my career in a time where I had to submit paper requests for servers that had turn around times measured in months.
I just don't see it. Given the nature of the services they offer it's just too risky not to use as much managed stuff with SLAs as possible. k8s alone is a very complicated control plane + a freaking database that is hard to keep happy if it's not completely static. In a prior life I went very deep on k8s, including self managing clusters and it's just too fragile, I literally had to contribute patches to etcd and I'm not a db engineer. I kept reading the post and seeing future failure point after future failure point.
The other aspect is there doesn't seem to be an honest assessment of the tradeoffs. It's all peaches and cream, no downsides, no tradeoffs, no risk assessment etc.
The article’s deployment has a spare rack in a second DC and they do a monthly cutover to AWS in case the colo provider has a two site issue.
Spending time on that would make me sleep much better than hardening a deployment of etcd running inside a single point of failure.
What other problems do you see with the article? (Their monthly time estimates seem too low to me - they’re all 10x better than I’ve seen for well-run public cloud infrastructure that is comparable to their setup).
Managing a complex environment is hard, no matter whether that’s deployed on AWS or on prem. You always need skilled workers. On one platform you need k8s experts. On the other platform you need AWS experts. Let’s not pretend like AWS is a simple one-click fire and forget solution.
And let’s be very real here: if your cloud service goes down for a few hours because you screwed something up, or because AWS deployed some bad DNS rules again, the world moves on. At the end of the day, nobody gives a shit.
Maybe I've drank the koolaid but I've done both a lot of systems level work and AWS work (I don't actually use any AWS stuff in my role here interestingly) and I think for a business that needs a handful of hosts in 2 AZs I can't imagine the ROI and risk profile being better to self host.
AWS truly does let you focus on your business logic and abstracts a TON of undifferentiated work and well beyond the low hanging fruit of system updates and load balancing.
I guess put another way, providing a SaaS you need to have an SLA, those SLAs flow from SLO and SLIs and ultimately a risk profile of your hw and sw. The risk of a bad HBA alone probably means a day of downtime if you don't do things perfectly. AWS has bad HBAs, CPUs, memory, disks etc all day long every day and it's not even a blip for customers, never mind downtime. And if you don't model bad HBAs in your SLAs then your board is going to be pissed when that outage inevitably happens.
Now if you don't have SLAs and you like sysops, networkops, clusterops, dbops work then sure, YOLO.
I'm wondering if changes to tax and accounting rules for CapEx is what really sent companies to the cloud. I do know that a lot of VC-backed companies don't want to own anything physical because that's a problem to be solved by the company that acquires them a few years down the road.
Indeed Kubernetes is problematic for the complexity and fragility reasons. It's a scalability problem, it's designed for big scale with kube staffs and situations where cost savings from bin packing etc outweigh costs of the resulting complexity.
But, SLAs are no good (who cares about getting refunded).
I agree that a business should use Kubernetes only if there is a clear need for that level of infrastructure automation. It's a time and money mistake to use K8s by default.
The cancer causing mechanism of asbestos is mechanical. A single strand in the wrong place could cut your DNA up. With any probabilistic process the more exposure the more chances and the greater the likelihood.
My large state university still has the same core required classes as it did 25 years ago. I don't think CS programs can veer to far away from teaching core computer science without losing accreditation.
They are saying the announcement means more to them than just a headline that most will scroll past. Maybe you are seeing something I'm not.