Because it's fun. That's it. I like new tech, I like playing with the "new hotness", it's fun to always try out the newest features. That's 100% the reason.
I could tell you it's because I always wanted to have the best camera, best battery life, etc and those are true too but the bottom line was: it was fun and I could afford it.
I've always known it wasn't the smartest financial decision but no one acts 100% financially "smart" and joy is something you can't measure the value of quite so easily, I got a lot of joy out of having the newest phone. Not as a "look at me, I have the newest phone", I never would shove it someone's face or even call attention to it, buying the new phone was for me, not for anyone else or some kind of "status".
It's a toy and I decided that it was worth the "waste" due to the excitement/joy I got from it.
To be honest, the phone is probably the piece of tech that most people use the most so per hour of use it's not that expensive. I guess the main question here is what you do with the old phones. Do you keep them as a museum or do you sell them/hand them down to family?
I'm still rocking my iPhone 12 mini but am planning on getting an 18 when the normal one is released :-)
Yeah like why did you upgrade last year or even the one before. I have a 15 and I can’t see anything I’m missing out on. I upgrade for the jumps. This year is the jump!
It's always been a joke that stock prediction is a rite of passage for software engineers introduced to ML training. I see the same is true for commodity LLMs.
> Imho excessive feature flag complexity is a symptom of management who are indecisive and mistrusted by the developers.
In my experience, engineers aren't using them to account for managerial dithering, they're doing it for safe deployments and experiments and rollouts and such. A product with millions of users can easily have a tens or even hundreds of active switches at any moment (I'm assuming a large engineering team behind said product), and that's not necessarily a bad thing.
However, as someone else noted here, you absolutely MUST delete and clean up your flags/gates/whatever when you've completed that effort. That part can be tricky because not everyone has the discipline to pay off tech debt.
Usually, a flag/gate should not live in code for more than a few months. If it does, it should have robust justification.
Stopped using Anthropic models for this reason. Their prose become too obtuse and just... alien. No human talks or writes like that. It's incredibly taxing to deal with.
This guy was caught for jamming cell phones on his commute to "keep people off their phones". I heard of a similar case of someone doing the same on their bus commute but don't have a link for that handy atm
This took months to investigate and was only detectable because the defendant did it along the same route each day. Random, sporadic jamming is essentially not prosecutable.
I agree and disagree. It all comes down to how much a human was involved with the code.
If the code is artisan to any degree (authored, edited, reviewed, etc.), it's a bit ridiculous.
It does makes sense to me if the human driver was hands-off the code because the conversation becomes the artifact.
I'm older, and have very mixed feelings about the latter case but it seems inevitable that engineers will be working at a higher level where conversational governance becomes important. We'll stop this charade of hiding AI contributions behind human identities. (Note: I don't think conversation IDs are what we need but it's a step down this path.)
Scanning the comments, I see some curiosity and outrage but little recognition that this is legally required in places like California and Colorado and Texas and probably some more places.
And federally, the C2PA strongly encourages digital providence albeit without legal consequences... yet.
All AI content coming from companies that service the US market are watermarking things.
reply