Complicated legal structures, and favorable treatment by a government who uses it as a form of cultural diplomacy. The tldr is that there's a nonprofit that owns the company that operates as Ikea, while there's some concessions made to a for-profit that owns the IKEA branding.
I am a Site Reliability Engineer (SRE), Google Style, with experience at both large and small organizations. I can help you build a Platform Engineering practice from the very beginning. I'm looking to help small dev teams increase their velocity by implementing best-practices of Devops: CI/CD, Kubernetes Deployments, and effective Monitoring frameworks.
I'm particularly selling my skills in PKI/TLS. My clients are rapidly moving to MTLS for all service-to-service authentication and even for browser-to-service authentication for internal tools.
They're increasingly turning to contracts with Comcast and AT+T so that even if you don't have them on the network, they can phone home on the neighbor's wifi.
That's because they understand how creepy it is. But you can find plenty of pieces about what great things it's doing for local municipalities, who have comparably small budgets, and read between the lines.
Lobbying groups are two-faced all of the time. Not just "some of the time that is a lot", but all of the time. Lobbying groups basically never do in private what they say they do in public, and it is more common than any other type of lobbying group that a lobbying group is working directly against its front-page public relations and name.
For a recent local to me example, an organization called "Lake Washington Working Families"[1] lobbies against bringing in a new food wholesaler in a food desert. Every word in the name is a lie; they are not based in lake Washington, or even Washington at all. They do not represent families and especially not working families. They represent a specific, powerful Union; I do not begrudge them representing the interests of their union members, but I do begrudge the outright lies that they are using to do so.
>Lobbying groups are two-faced all of the time. Not just "some of the time that is a lot", but all of the time. Lobbying groups basically never do in private what they say they do in public, and it is more common than any other type of lobbying group that a lobbying group is working directly against its front-page public relations and name.
Seems like a hasty generalization. The NRA, workers unions, oil companies, crypto all openly advocate for exactly what their supporters want. One Seattle astroturf group doesn't really get me convinced of "all of the time".
It would be a stronger argument if you directly spoke on the topic of Freedom House, instead of veering to a random psyop.
Can you give examples of Freedom House acting "Two-faced"? As JuniperMesos quoted from Wikipedia, they were founded in 1941, so it shouldn't be hard for you to find a precise example over their ~85 years of operation that backs up your claim.
What could they possibly be doing to advocate against freedom in secret? My impression is that most of their time is spent on their ratings and news articles.
They are accused of being "Right center"[1] by MBFC, while Heritage foundation accuses[2] them of being partisan left. Seems to me that they are focused on their goals, freedom, while upsetting those that oppose it, regardless of politics.
As we have seen throughout history and recently[3], authoritarianism is not attached to one side of the political spectrum, which makes me think they are more reputable.
I am a Site Reliability Engineer (SRE), Google Style, with experience at both large and small organizations. I can help you build a Platform Engineering practice from the very beginning. I'm looking to help small dev teams increase their velocity by implementing best-practices of Devops: CI/CD, Kubernetes Deployments, and effective Monitoring frameworks.
I'm particularly selling my skills in PKI/TLS. My clients are rapidly moving to MTLS for all service-to-service authentication and even for browser-to-service authentication for internal tools.
I am a Site Reliability Engineer (SRE), Google Style, with experience at both large and small organizations. I can help you build a Platform Engineering practice from the very beginning. I'm looking to help small dev teams increase their velocity by implementing best-practices of Devops: CI/CD, Kubernetes Deployments, and effective Monitoring frameworks.
I'm particularly selling my skills in PKI/TLS. My clients are rapidly moving to MTLS for all service-to-service authentication and even for browser-to-service authentication for internal tools.
Because the true name of the feature is VisualSourceSafe actions. It's all over the code of the runner if you take a second to look, and the runner, like the rest of the feature, is of typical early 2000s Microsoft quality, which is to say, none at all.
The LLM presents a perverse incentive here - It is used for perceived efficiency gains, most of which would be consumed by the act of rewriting and redrafting. The alienness of the thoughts in the document is also non-condusive to this; Reading a long document about something you think you know but did not write is exhausting and mentally painful - This is why code review has such relatively poor results.
Quite frankly, while having an LLM draft and rewriting it would be okay, I do not believe it is reasonable to expect that to ever happen. It will be either like high school paper plagarism (Just change around some of the sentences and rephrase it bro), or it will simply not even get that much. It is unreasonable with what we know about human psychology to expect that "Human-Rewrites of LLM drafts", at the level that the human contributes something, are maintainable and scalable; Most people psychologically can't put in that effort.
>The LLM presents a perverse incentive here - It is used for perceived efficiency gains, most of which would be consumed by the act of rewriting and redrafting.
It might give efficiency gains for the writer, but the reader has to read the slop and try to guess at what it was intending to communicate and weed out "hallucinations". That's a big loss of efficiency for the reader.
I just can't seem to square up that the same people that complained left-and-right about "code smells" are the same ones that are shitting out slop code and are proud they shipped 50k lines of code in a week. It's going to be a maintenance nightmare for someone else. I'm not sure how anyone coming in is going to learn a codebase written by LLMs when it's 10x more code than is reasonably needed to solve the problem.
I really like this approach. I worked on this problem (create a nice background for an image) for a couple weeks many years ago while organizing my desktop wallpaper collection, and never came up with a good answer. Unfortunately, I think that it's been "solved" in the tiktok era; an enlarged and blurred version of the image is used to fill the background space.
The blurred mirror is inoffensive to almost everyone, and yet it always strikes me as gauche. Easy to ignore and yet I feel that it adds a lot of useless visual noise.
https://www.europeanceo.com/business-and-management/ikea-com...
reply