I actually love the original BSG. And the new one started out strong but the writers clearly didn't have a plan for where they wanted things to go despite the opening credits insisting the Cylons have a plan.
Agreed. Not to mention the original BSG was strangled in its crib for costing too much. Something a production in the aughts didn't have to worry much about.
For every topic of A vs B where A and B are related in some way, no matter how small, there exists an argument C where two people take increasingly opposed positions about which is better.
The article mentions a decline in the number of regions Deno Deploy has in production. It isn't criticizing the runtime, but the confusion is understandable since they have similar product names.
I wonder if there's a reason why there's a decline that the Deno people could weigh in on? Perhaps it's not a money issue, but some other reason why they decided to scale back the number of regions.
This comment is silly and not a great critique of Star Trek economics.
To hack Star Trek imagine the replicator system as a transport pad and then think about who controls the transporters. Next, imagine the phaser system as a transporter pad. Now you have a critique.
Not sure about the critical consensus, but VALIS is by far my favorite Dick's book. I read almost all of his works and love very many short stories and novels, however VALIS is in a class of its own in science fiction IMO.
The title is also brilliant: mysterious and vague until you learn what is stands for. What's not to like?
Sure, if you are reading the word "arguably" completely literally, but that's not the colloquially understood implication of the term when used to describe a work. Obviously the author of the parent comment is implying they they would possibly consider it the best PKD novel, but the colloquial meaning implied when someone uses the word arguably, generally isn't just to describe one's own opinion, but a significant portion of the popular or critical consensus.
One person could take a position opposed to the general held consensus on any topic, but if one person is the only one to hold this opinion, in english, it would generally not be described as a position that is "arguably" the case, even though if you read the word literally, one person is technically arguing it.
Also, I asked because I wanted to get the above user's opinion on the matter, not your dismissive comment which isn't contributing anything. I've read the VALIS trilogy, but I've never heard any of VALIS trilogy novels described as possibly PKD's best work.
That's interpreting a lot from just four words. Opinion probably wasn't the best word for what I was referring to, but more-so their reference point for claiming that it is arguably his best work. My comment may seem dismissive to someone who hasn't read PKD, but VALIS is generally never considered a contender for his best work. To suggest that it is seems absurd which is why I responded as I did.
I am torn on whether I used the word arguably correctly in my original comment. When I first posted it, I thought I could find many sources that had argued it was PKD's best work.
Upon trying to find those sources I could only find Terence Mckenna's article on it, in which he doesn't exactly argue that it is PKD's best work https://sirbacon.org/dick.htm
Perhaps I now believe that those who read the book and "got it" would argue that it's his best book and perhaps even the best title.
But part of me wondered just now if those sources were out there and now I cannot find them.
This vibes with my multiyear theory that Tesla self-driving is someone in China driving your car for you like a racing simulator. Perhaps the graphics are even game-ified so the work stays mysterious.
There's a car company that runs in vegas that does exactly that. You rent the car for a few hours and it will be driven up to you by a remote driver and then when you're done it'll drive off remotely. No AI needed.
Sure, the other effects is that they're much more likely to be driving at night, overextended their waking hours, distracted by friends / a date / a prostitute, and driving a route that they do not normally drive.
How could you not be 10x more likely to crash than the nurse getting off at 2am who has driven the route a thousand times and knows all the bad blind spots / bad intersections / is still well within her normal waking hours. That is much closer to the normal profile of the sober people who are out driving during prime drinking hours.
This is hopefully illegal and not actually what is done, because I have learned from Waymo that it is not permissible or even possible for the CS reps to remotely drive the car. They merely push "suggestion" commands to be considered by the onboard Waymo Driver.
Remote human drivers have too much latency and not enough realtime information available to "drive" a vehicle on public roads.
> In the event of an emergency, the vehicle automatically puts itself into a safe state within milliseconds by coming to a safe stop in the same lane.
It sounds to me like the hardware has some amount of autonomy. They just aren't trying to do the high level stuff. Both companies seem like they're trying to hide the implementation details though which immediately makes me suspicious of them.
Yeah I was surprised too when they handed me a voucher when I left a hotel last time I was there. Really cool concept. I wasn't able to use it because it was only on iPhone
They wouldn't be in Berlin, you want to go to cheaper labor places than Las Vegas, which are plentiful in the US, and even more plentiful in Mexico if you want reasonably low latency to the US.
I'd be more concerned about the remote driver's internet connection crapping out. The car probably has multiple simultaneous cellular connections (e.g. PepLink SpeedFusion hot failover type thing).
It’s not merely about latency, but you also need to consider that any ‘remote driver‘ will have less telemetry, and of a lower quality, than an onboard AI driver.
A human operator wouldn’t even be able to read or interpret the types of data which would be collected and sent by a vehicle such as a FSD Tesla or a Waymo.
Now as I understand it, military forces are really good at remotely operated drones/UAVs so perhaps the tech does exist in parallel, but those are two distinct applications.
Oh well you’re assuming now that each remote human “vay.io” operator is only simultaneously responsible for only one vehicle at a time?
Furthermore, that’s a brand-confusion name they’re d/b/a. “Veyo” is a very well established ride sharing provider, based in San Diego, and specializing in human drivers for NEMT.
Come, Mister Tally-Mon, Tally Me Banana: Daylight Come And Me Wann’ Go Home
> someone in China driving your car for you like a racing simulator.
while sleeping and connected by NeuraLink. Before Musk/NeuraLink gets to me though, judging by the content of some of my dreams, i've been driving a space-folding spaceships for some aliens.
> This vibes with my multiyear theory that Tesla self-driving is someone in China driving your car for you like a racing simulator. Perhaps the graphics are even game-ified so the work stays mysterious.
There were scenes from Black Panther in which Shuri drives a car in Korea remotely from Wakanda. I thought, wow, she can do that from thousands of km away with zero latency! They must have super advanced tech to have solved the network latency problem.
The author clearly is referring to cloud apps that require one to be online with their collaborator to edit. The alternative is a locally encrypted self-congratulated neural mesh network where one computes their own inputs to the hard drive.
That's not how it should work though. The post should get encrypted only once with a symmetric key i.e. AES, and then this gets encrypted with each of the followers' public keys. So it's not the post itself but the encryption key that must be scaled. This is how PGP-encrypted E-mail works.
that sounds like a UX nightmare, what happens when you approve a new follower? do you encrypt your entire post history for them? how long would that take ?
If you are syncing data from another PDS, there is no way to verify that posts have an accurate date, unless you have some central ledger which is antithetical to allowing self-hosting and being distributed.
Correct. The trade-off here is on Bluesky you can delete or re-order your posts which you cannot do on a network with strict message ordering. Your PDS webmaster can also rewrite your messages for you if they become unhappy with your messaging.
This isn't quite true. Your PDS can't rewrite your messages: all messages are signed with a key unique to your account.
That said, the PDS is effectively also your private key custodian. Most people who aren't nerds are happy to let Bluesky PBC manage their keys. But if that's your threat model, you should absolutely move to a self-managed PDS.
The protocol also actually allows you to manage your keys differently. You could in theory have a "read-only" PDS, and generate all your posts locally using a local key (conceptually much closer to a crypto wallet.)
In that scenario, the validity of posts as originating from a known identity is extremely strong.
Yes, and what if they had a tab in the Bluesky app where you generated a keypair, registered the pubkey at your PDS and then began signing messages in the app? You could rotate keys on demand and update the PDS every time you make a new one.
I don't think it should be the primary operation, not with the scale that Bluesky has achieved. We need this in the Bluesky App so a handful of p2p weirdos can feel they are authentically using a distributed social platform without caesars and all of that.
I'll look into the registry override too, maybe I can hack something together around that.
There's ways around it... the identity mechanism supports multiple keys so you could have a backup in escrow.
But most people don't want to worry about key management at that level. Hell, I know exactly how everything works, and key management still scares me. The consequences of a mistake are huge.
Yes, that key is screwed because it's lost, stolen, at the bottom of the river, etc. But this is when you generate a new key and store that pubkey at your PDS so the Appview can find and index your new posts from your new phone. It's the same thing that happens when I reinstall Debian on my Thinkpad and upload a new ed25519 pubkey to Github so I can push again.
Your PDS webmaster has a signing key for your repo, because they for all intents and purposes are you. That's the trust structure of how PDS' are setup. If you don't trust someone else to modify your repo don't give them your private (sub)key.
The fact it's a subkey means that you are also able to rotate the key that the PDS has access to and modify your repo back to pre-defaced state if need be.
Imagine if Github worked this way, then I wouldn't have to worry about storing my ssh keys on my local machine. Imagine the possibilities if Github could pull my repo instead of me having to go through all that darned trouble of pushing it.
reply