At some point it’s pretty much the whole country. That’s a sad display right there.

You can learn a lot about a person from their friends.

I think you’re just asking when people form their first coherent memories.

This is about 2 to 3 years old.

Can you explain your ten dollars example in a different way?

Thinner until I can shave with this thing.

Oooh, I’ve done this before! Not for obfuscation, mind you, but sometimes it’s just easier to abuse this call if you can’t find the gadgets you want or if you expect them to change.

Figured it would be IAT. The near memory feature looks cool too. I can definitely imagine several applications.

When you forget your plumbus at home.

They don’t need to run failure studies. That basic characterization work is mostly already done for you. Component vendors (should) publish tables of mean time between failure for the components you’re buying that can be used to get a rough estimation with just a few minutes of effort. Typically it’s indexed by temperature, like for caps, but depends on the part.

Now, does the bottom of the market actually use those tables? I can’t say for sure. I know one high power headlamp company does this for their LED drivers to balance lifetime with output, but I can’t know for sure what every business does.

I didn’t even read the title, haha. That wasn’t meant to be a correction but a suggestion that the frog dude get more fibre. I edited my original comment.

Get More Fiber.

The LED bulb itself is not typically the reason that these fail. There’s also complex regulation circuitry which consists of far more complex components than a single LED. Electrolytic capacitors and driver circuits can have shorter lifetimes than the actual bulb.

With that said, manufacturers know this, so they also tend to overdrive lower cost LEDs to bring the failure rates in line with the rest of the circuit. This sounds like this may be what has happened to you just based on the dimming, but without knowing exactly how they have wired it up, it’s difficult to be sure.

Can’t they simply buy citizenship for $1 million now too?

That’s really excessive.

And that’s fantastic! That’s what technology is supposed to do IMHO - Give you more free time because of that efficiency. That’s technology making life better for humans. I’m glad that you’re experiencing that.

If they’re not hallucinating as you use them, then I’m afraid we just have different experiences. Perhaps you’re using better models or you’re using your tools more effectively than I am. In that case, I must respect that you are having a different and equally legitimate experience.

Eh, that hasn’t been my experience. Lemmy users have by and large been rather open minded and they understand that there’s different degrees and nuance to political opinions.

With that said, I’m biased because I’m obviously a Lemmy user, and I stay away from .ml mostly. YMMV.

I do have a concern for the health of the overall ecosystem though. Don’t all good devs start out as bad ones? There still needs to be a reasonable on-ramp for these people.

It’s rare to see such a complete and well-thought-out response anywhere on the Internet. Great job in capturing the nuance. It’s a powerful and often-misused tool.

It sounds to me like you’ve got a good head on your shoulders and you’re actually using the tool effectively. You’re keeping yourself in control and using it to expand your own capabilities, not offloading your job responsibilities, which is how more inept management views AI.

I think your question is covered by the original commentator. They do hallucinate often, and the job does become using the tool more effectively which includes capturing and correcting those errors.

Naturally, greater efficiency is an element of job reduction. They can be both hallucinating often and creating additional efficiency that reduces jobs.