> my dashboard page didn't load, then it told me there are no open tickets in the system, then clicking on a different ticket number to open it didn't do anything, and then the server stopped responding.
Like all SaaS in-house implementations, this is entirely on how your company's ServiceNow developers.
I've worked on multiple SNOW implementations and things can go really bad when you go crazy with the customizations.
Your comment makes me understand the product even less. So it’s SaaS where you have to develop it yourself? What exactly is the company providing? Why do its customers simultaneously want to outsource this to a vendor and then spend resources customizing it down to the level of “basic CRUD operations work” and “the user sees a search field”?
ServiceNow is a platform-as-a-service (PaaS), not a SaaS, that allows development of new products on top of it.
At its core, there is a workflow management engine that third parties can use to implement their own, stateful, process centric products and services.
We have ServiceNow proper (the CRM) and a completely unrelated to CRM third party product that we have purchased and which is implemented on the ServiceNow platform. Both have nothing to do with each other and are used by different business users.
You don't develop it, you develop on it. SN provides the underlying software, implementations, hosting, upgrades, etc. Salesforce is another example of this.
And that wasn't really AI, it was more like automation.
Was hoping the article would be about stadium experiences like the announcer, jumbotron, etc. all being AI-driven. When I judge the experience of gameday, concessions are like third on that list. Disappointed with the content.
I mostly agree, and would say you should just play it blind. If you care about getting 100% (112% after the DLC) there are probably a couple of things where looking them up would be useful. It is also a very big world, so trying to do cleanup once you have all exploration tools can be quite involved
How do you know if you enjoy playing the game without a guide if you don't do it? Looking something up to unstuck yourself is one thing, but following a guide from beginning to end is robbing yourself of the opportunity to enjoy the game as presented.
"beating the game as quickly as possible" is such an obviously flawed reason to use a guide that I won't even respond to it. If you don't have the time to play the game, don't.
It's the thing about type I fun and type II fun, where type I is "fun while it's happening" and type II is "not fun while it's happening but fun in retrospect": if you don't use a guide, the type II fun that results may be greater in quality and impact than the type I fun you'd get using a guide
Depends on who you ask. Trump himself seems to think the US is getting 10% for free. I think that's a fair assessment given that these grants were already supposed to be paid out to Intel, without any kind of equity stake promised.
Worth noting that Intel is the only company that had these kinds of shenanigans pulled with their grant. Samsung, TSMC, Micron and others were granted similar funds without any kind of withholding or demands for equity from the federal government.
> Worth noting that Intel is the only company that had these kinds of shenanigans pulled with their grant.
Sure, but Intel's new CEO is making a lot of noise that indicates that Intel is maybe not going to be able/willing to build some-to-many of the things the CHIPS money paid for.
Giving FedGov a 10% stake in the company [0] is better than taking the money back for nonperformance, wouldn't you say?
[0] Which -as I understand it- was the sort of thing that was done for those finance companies that were Too Big To Fail when all that fraud^W novel financial engineering eventually caught up to them.
Trump feels Biden gave intel billions for nothing. Trump feels he’s balanced the scales by getting 10% of Intel. Trump gets to spin it as getting 10% of Intel for nothing.
It's effectively a grant. The US government isn't buying existing shares. Intel is issuing new shares and selling them to the US government - so actual money is being transferred to Intel (and existing shares are being diluted as a result).
Many worrisome aspects with this in terms of smelling like a super bubble.
Even being bullish on LLMs, it is not obvious this is the right paradigm even for AGI let alone something beyond AGI.
Seems like it could be 10 years from now
"Remember during the peak of the bubble when Zuckerberg was paying researchers 100 million dollars to try to make a super humanoid robot out of just a mouth?"
In times past, we used to have things like clubs and user groups. For the most part, they held open meetings. Anyone could attend without commitment. These meeting not only served the interests of members and the community, but they also served to engage people who would become members. Members paid dues. Dues paid the bills.
If it was a community based organization (ham radio, open source developers, etc.) and the membership worked out outreach, you could usually find someone who would provide a meeting space. Perhaps it would be at a local business. Perhaps it would be at a local university. Perhaps it would be at a local community centre or library. Even if you did have to pay for the space, there were typically a lot of inexpensive spaces to rent for an hour or two. But the key word is community based. There was always a surplus of space if you knew where to look and who to ask. Some people were willing to donate it and others were willing to let it be used for a nominal fee.
That seemed to change 10 or 20 years ago. I'm not quite sure as to the reason why.
