I was about to ask why on earth an HTTP client needs 1500 employees and a 5B valuation, but then I realized that perhaps it is just envy speaking.
Im simply envious that I dont own an AI-native cloud-first enterprise-grade zero-trust secure-by-design API lifecycle management ecosystem powered by agentic AI workflows autonomous coding agents pre built skills context graphs semantic knowledge retrieval augmented generation multi agent collaboration next generation developer productivity acceleration platform with a revolutionary cURL GUI client valued at 5 billion dollars with 1500 employees
tom hardware website genuinely looks like some kind of satire or meta-irony about ads. When "What’s the max you’re willing to pay for a new Keyboard?" insert and "
Get club Access Quick" popup kick in at the same time there is almost no content left on the screen, just ads. I don't believe this is not some kind of a sick joke!
I always thought there is a system of rail signals which should prevent accidents like this always in place, like dividing railroad into sections, turn on red light if the next section is occupied, yellow before that and so on...
Did it fail somehow which lead to this accident? I think such systems must be redundant enough to survive even without power/computers?
- A fault in the signaling system caused an Iryo and a Renfe train to stop -- the Iryo train was in front.
- For some reason, the control center authorized the Renfe train to proceed at full speed, despite the cab signaling showing it should stop. It then hit the Iryo train that was stopped in front of it.
Reading between the lines, it sounds like the main issues that caused this are likely:
- Poor / improper maintenance causes the primary signaling/communication system to frequently fail. The standard "correct" behavior in this case is to manually authorize stopped trains to proceed slowly (at approx 10 mph so they can stop if they see another train) to the next station and wait for the system to be restored.
- Since the system was frequently failing and proceeding at slow speeds causes severe operational slowdowns, the control center started allowing them to proceed at linespeed instead, possibly with some ad-hoc checks to make sure the track was clear.
- That got normalized, and whatever ad-hoc checks (if any) they were doing failed in this case.
> - Since the system was frequently failing and proceeding at slow speeds causes severe operational slowdowns, the control center started allowing them to proceed at linespeed instead, possibly with some ad-hoc checks to make sure the track was clear.
- That got normalized, and whatever ad-hoc checks (if any) they were doing failed in this case.
This is a 200km/h line, which is right at the limit of the speed where you don't need in-cabin signaling (plenty of lines in France run at 200km/h without it), which explains why a careless control center operator could end up in this spot.
Hum, I wonder just right now if allowing the train to go to full speed (and giving priority to the restart over other trains) was related with the pressure of carrying a prominent politician. Have the team of the ex-minister pressed RENFE with the need to arrive urgently so "just ignore the protocol this time"?.
Is speculation of course but at this moment we must evaluate every hypothesis.
Politicians are the kind of people that are caught in the highway driving at 200 Km/h, just to arrive in time to a meeting in a 20 people's village. Could explain the strange control behavior.
>Should we legalize heroin and legalize advertising heroin on TV?
Im always amused by this line of thought, should we make alcohol illegal then and ban advertising it on tv? What about soda with too much sugar? Should we, perhaps, ban everything which is addictive and causes any harm?
I too am amused by people who can’t draw distinctions between degrees of things.
But note I didn’t present the “people want to do it” argument. My view is things should be balanced between their antisocial risks and their prosocial value.
IMO yes there should be extremely high taxes on high-sugar concentration foods and beverages, and probably additional impediments to their advertising. We have alternative sweeteners that do not destroy the financial viability of our healthcare system, and we should tilt the tables in their favor. High antisocial risks, low prosocial benefits compared to readily available alternatives.
Alcohol is dicier as there is a real prosocial value to it that’s non-trivial to replace, but it too should probably be taxed more aggressively as we know that small tax increases disproportionately affect the most problematic consumers of alcohol.
Note how this argument isn’t “people want to do it therefore it should be allowed?” Or “people can be harmed by it therefore it should be disallowed?”
Even if we accept your risk-benefit framework, it doesnt follow that banning something improves overall welfare.
Prohibition has costs of its own: black markets, organised crime, unsafe products, enforcement expenses and incarceration.
You acknowledge that alcohol has social benefits, but apparently heroin doesnt. Why? Because alcohol facilitates socialisation? Because its culturally accepted? Who gets to determine the "prosocial value" of an activity? Almost any unhealthy behavior can be framed as a societal cost.
Theres an enormous amount of subjectivity here. Some people genuinely enjoy recreational drug use. Others enjoy gambling, despite knowing they will probably lose money.
You are arguing that the state should determine which activities are permissible based on their net social utility. Im arguing that danger alone should not give the state a right to prohibit consenting adults from engaging in any activity. Individual autonomy has value in itself, including the freedom to make decisions that are objectively bad for oneself.
I don't think too much of an insight is needed to understand that most of them 30000 code changes per day is just going around in circles, agent A introducing some kind of new abstraction, agent B finding and refactoring that abstraction, agent C figuring out that refactored abstraction introduced regressions, fixing and creating new tests for an abstraction, agent D finding out new abstraction was not needed in the first place and cleaning it up. Management s ecstatic seeing 4 merged PRs – time to make a blog post about merges per day growing more than tenfold.
>We do 25 gazillion code checkouts per day and we merge 30 trillizillion code changes per day because we have 10 megazilion agents working on TEN MILLION projects at the same time in a 100 PETABYTE monorepo. Git is just not enough for us...
Every time any detail comes out of Anthropic or OpenAI it usually turns out whatever they’re doing is just incompetence. Right now I’d put money on that anything they were doing with git was incompetent garbage and they decided that the path of least resistance was to vibecode this thing.
And yet self-reliance is a virtue for nation-states, too. Every serious country on the planet has an agricultural and industrial policy specifically calibrated to ensure adequate domestic production of essential goods and services.
There's a happy medium somewhere between Juche and just-in-time rawdogging global markets.
unfortunately it made some mistakes and didn't make everything secure.
im sure windows security will get better as models get better...
maybe in six months when we have AGI... . . .
reply