Huh, TIL. I guess the image is just clickbait then.

The only thing that comes to mind is that undersea cables are often under attack by sharks.

I have to disagree with that. Most positions in factory jobs exist because human labour is very cheap, especially in terms of flexibility. I doubt there are many positions where a robot with a less humanoid shape wouldn’t do a better job than a human or a humanoid robot. It’s just often cheaper to employ these workers because you pay them a salary, either on a hourly basis or on a monthly one, yet don’t have to worry about maintenance. With robots you have less hourly costs, but a much bigger overhead, as you now have to hire qualified technicians to perform regular maintenance on those machines, and also semi-regularly order replacement parts. These costs will rise alongside the complexity of these robots. And humanoid robots are much, much more complex than industrial robots, especially as they need to incorporate a lot more sensors that most industrial robots just won’t need. Sensors that might be very sensitive or require regular calibrations to ensure they work properly. That doesn’t come cheap.

Even when we look over the costs, humans will always be more versatile than robots. Give a person a book on how to do a job and they will perform it with the help of the books, and develop their working style to even work more efficiently. In contrast, robots would need a much more thorough training in order to work properly. This could be done traditionally by hardcoding the logic, or by using neural networks, which would be more intuitive, but are prone to create undesired results if one doesn’t have a good eye for the involved factors. And this process would need to be repeated for each job, and again if jobs would be fused together. And of course one would have to adhere for hardware limitations. A processor can only work so fast, and there are limitations on storage space, data transfer speed and reliability that also come to play when it comes to saving the training data.

Then what niche will they fulfill? What work requires a humanoid form?

The easiest way is Docker Desktop, though I myself installed only the docker engine itself, which still was pretty easy to do. I did that because I had a dedicated server with no GUI. It does require to add the reposity though, but the documentation is pretty straightforward to follow.

Did you sync your library? It was confusing for the first time for me as well, but Jellyfin requires you to synchronise your library if you add or remove files.

Docker is basically similar to a flatpak: you download a package via Docker and it will practically do everything for you, so you only have to take care of the config file, if even needed.

I’m sceptical with Windows, considering that most programs are installed via EXE files, so the outcry will be huge. But I’m not saying it can’t be a possibility.

With Ubuntu there would only be a chance of it happening if they also make their distro immutable. That way the user could not as easily install packages the traditional way. But even then there might be ways to disable this immutable mode for troubleshooting. However, this, in my opinion, would cause a mass exodus as Canonical does not have the same advantage as Microsoft or Google have: Windows and android are, to an extent, closed off ecosystems. Thus switching to another system is very hard, as not every software is available on every other system, so potentially subpar alternatives and comparability layers, whose functionality mostly depends on whether the company behind the original system is actively fighting against these tools or not. Ubuntu on the other hand, is a Linux distro, so you cab make it like Theseus and recreate this distro more or less with the sum of its parts, if need be.

If a factory can afford robots, they already have acquired it. Industrial robots excel at their work already due to them being extremely precise already. If you need transportation robots, there are already ones that euter run on embedded rails or are already fully self-driving using wheels. Humanoid robots solve no issues that the industry hasn’t already solved. It would just be a robot that would be less stable compared to any other transportation robot nor as precise as stationed ones while also more complex, and thus easier to break down, with the only upside it being that it’s more of a generalist, but that is also sort of a moot point because a human could do it still cheaper.

The real use case of humanoid robots is very niche, with it being in environment where classic robot models fails, that being an environment that cannot be modified for classic robot use (e.g. mountainous terrain) where flying is not a viable option. After all, the human body, and the bodies of quite a few animals, excel at climbing rough and steep terrain whereas most, if not all, currently commercially available robots fail at it, or at the very least do very poorly.

I wouldn’t say you’re too cynical with that view. I mean, the 2 German public broadcast channels (ARD, ZDF) are under constant fire for basically catering to an audience that is slowly dying out - both metaphorically and physically. Sure, some of these shows still have some popularity with younger generations, but that is few and far between. It’s pretty much the same idea that plagues big corporations - change is scary as it poses a risk, so they avoid it - even if they literally have nothing to lose.

And I agree that the fractured streaming environment made it ever harder to license content. However, I don’t think they should focus on licensing content to begin with. Instead, offer more grants for independent studios to create publicly available movies and shows. I mean, as we speak, Glitch is funding multiple shows to be viewed for free on YouTube. Why can’t public broadcast channels do that more too?

As an example of the system being reworked into a better one: Germany’s equivalent not only finances public broadcast channels, but also youtubers through the program FUNK. Granted, a lion’s share still goes into the old TV channels, but at least that includes the French/German channel Arte, which has some top notch content (though usually documentaries) that it regularly uploads onto YouTube.

Do you really need the entire installation? Would only the user folder(s) (C:\Users) suffice?

Alternatively, you could install Linux mint on a large enough USB stick and run it off there, if you don’t mind the longer read/write times. You’d also need to change the boot order for it too.

Not only that, but they are crucial for network security. VPNs allow all network traffic (with a few necessary exceptions) to be routed through the company’s network and benefit from its security measures, mainly monitoring traffic for suspicious and malicious behaviour. Without it, finding compromised PCs is much harder and enforcing company policies regarding web use would be impossible outside the office.

One company that I can recommend is Withings. They do have an companion app, but a lot of devices do work on their own, and when not, they work with Google Fit or HomeAssistant, though probably due to that fact the products are pricier.

I’d argue most people just aren’t parasitic enough to willingly exploit both their sellers, workers and customers in the scale of how Amazon did and still does.

But do you also sometimes leave out AI for steps the AI often does for you, like the conceptualisation or the implementation? Would it be possible for you to do these steps as efficiently as before the use of AI? Would you be able to spot the mistakes the AI makes in these steps, even months or years along those lines?

The main issue I have with AI being used in tasks is that it deprives you from using logic by applying it to real life scenarios, the thing we excel at. It would be better to use AI in the opposite direction you are currently use it as: develop methods to view the works critically. After all, if there is one thing a lot of people are bad at, it’s thorough critical thinking. We just suck at knowing of all edge cases and how we test for them.

Let the AI come up with unit tests, let it be the one that questions your work, in order to get a better perspective on it.

Honestly, I think that this was a horrid read. It felt so unfocused, shallow and at times contradictory.

For example, at the top it talked about how software implementation has the highest adoption rate while code review/acceptance has the lowest, yet it never really talks about why that is apart from some shallow arguments (which I will come back later), or how to integrate AI more there.

And it never reached any depth, as any topic only gets grazed shortly before moving to the next, to the point where the pitfalls of overuse of AI (tech debt, security issues, etc.) are mentioned, twice, with no apparent acknowledgement of its former mention, and never mentioned how these issues get created nor show any examples.

And what I think is the funniest contradiction is that from the start, including the title, the article pushes for speed, yet near the end of the article, it discourages this thinking, saying that pushing dev teams for faster development will lead to corner cutting, and that for a better AI adoption one shouldn’t focus on development speed. Make up your damn mind before writing the article!

I haven’t watched the video yet, but I think TADC has unwillingly joined the “kids” content mill, which is probably what might be referenced.

Even Gooseworx dislikes how those content mill channels have abused TADC’s popularity for their own profit while neither she nor Glitch can do much about it.

Funnily enough, Signal has circumvented the issue by marking their chat window as DRM content, making it invisible to Recall.

I’m not the one who you asked, but I’d still give some feedback of my own. Musk as a person is a difficult character. I would even go as far as calling him narcissistic.

• He got thrown out of PayPal for his incessant micromanagement and disruptions to the flow of the company
• he bought himself into Tesla to replace the CEO with himself
• he tends to depict himself as one of the greatest tech geniuses out there, yet often the plans he presents to the public are often poorly thought out and serve no other purpose than to show his “talents”
• when his proposal to build a tiny submarine for the Than Luang cave rescue was shot down and a British diver was chosen instead he resorted to call the diver a “pedo guy”
• his latest attempts in politics, especially concerning DOGE feel completely half baked and, again, how he presents himself in his position feels more like an ego trip than something more reasonable
• he publicly had talks with the controversial German political party “Alternative für Deutschland”, which are currently legally considered “assured right-wing extremists” and have had a history of having Nazis and Nazi sympathisers in their ranks

I generally can’t trust someone who seems to put himself first at everything to handle anything related to security when the role allows him to exploit it for his own gains. And I do not trust someone who supports political groups known for trying to oppress minorities to defend actual rights for free speech.