Not saying where I learned this from, but the Amazon fulfillment services (fulfillment centers and their 1st party delivery services) have a greater than 30% month over month turnover in my region. No one taking these jobs has any intention of making a career out of it and most aren't even planning to work them for more than a couple months at most. That is exactly the kind of environment that encourages gaming the system in the way you describe because the risk of getting fired within the expected time period employment is so low that it isn't worth doing the job right.
I misread month over month as YoY. That's insane. I don't think even Uber has a lower turnover rate and drivers are independent contractors in that case.
The joke about Juggalo facepaint is both true and funny but I think there is some actual merit to that idea. Camo clothing (and I don't mean the kind you see everyone wearing at rural WalMartss) goes in and out of fashion every couple years. Military-style jackets, boots, and caps (think of a stereotypical anarchist style) are also perennially in style with certain crowds. I don't think it's too far fetched to imagine a future where camo facepaint becomes fashionable enough to be widespread, there's also a lot of artistic potential available in non-traditional patterns and colors.
I can't really see a way for AI cameras to get around properly applied facepaint, especially varieties that are IR absorbent or reflective. I hold the human brain in very high regard when it comes to pattern/symbol/shape recognition and if facepainting techniques are good enough to trick human visual processing, it's going to be good enough to fool any existing AI. For an example of what I mean by proper technique, refer to this video: https://youtu.be/YpzUr3twW4Q
The trick is in getting enough people to adopt such a strategy that you can't be identified through simple exclusion. I think the idea of camo/other facepaint isn't so foreign and unappealing as to never come into common fashion.
> I can't really see a way for AI cameras to get around properly applied facepaint,
In video people move, and 3D information can be recovered unless their faces are painted with something like Black 2.0. At which point why not just wear a mask?
> I don't think it's too far fetched to imagine a future where camo facepaint becomes fashionable enough to be widespread
A lot of those masks people in China wear they refer to as privacy masks (though this seems more an auxiliary usage -- especially in HK -- where the primary use is for filtering air). So I'd say there is evidence of such styles already becoming fashionable.
And how much of that 75nm feature is getting picked up by a diamond stylus? The stylii used in metrology grade surface roughness and contour analyzers can't pick up features even remotely close to that size and those are far finer and more sensitive that a turntables stylus.
Pension funds have been allowed to decay so far in such an unseen manner that there is now a universal aversion to peering behind the curtain because the naked truth is too terrible for anyone to process. That there are only a handful of small, independent journalists/bloggers willing to touch the subject, as is the case with this article, is a sign that there is fear at the highest levels of a national conversation on the issue which would be born from honest reporting by mainstream sources. The ramifications that stem from exposing the pension system as utterly broken beyond repair would threaten to topple the whole house of cards propping up modern society.
CalPERS in particular has become subject to multiple mini-scandals recently. The first of which is the competency of their latest CEO and the thoroughness of their hiring practices (1). Even the most charitable interpretation of her resume and skillset would arrive at the conclusion that Marcie Frost is a figurehead/cheerleader type CEO at best. Combine that with the recent announcement of Yu Ben Meng's return to CalPERS as CIO and there is certainly room for concern (2). Meng left CalPERS in 2015 to serve as deputy chief investment officer of China's $3.2 trillion State Administration of Foreign Exchange. We are now facing a situation where the nation's largest public pension is managed by a man considered so trustworthy by the country we are currently waging a trade war against that they placed him in charge of their largest capital fund. Even if everything is financially and legally above board, this kind of tone-deafanagemeny by the CalPERS board does not induce great confidence in their leadership or stewardship abilities.
The police are using red flag laws to seize weapons because the 'private free-market Stasi' told them to?
Red flag laws are mostly used to prevent suicides and domestic violence. They are formal proceedings and due process of law. If the problem is with the law, organize and change it.
There is no due process. Due process would be (1) a hearing prior to your property being confiscated; and (2) the ability to face your accuser. None of these happen with any existing red flag laws and violate multiple items in the Bill of Rights. Additionally, in most states' implementations of these laws, there are no codified repercussions for false reportings. It's effectively legalized SWATting.
They have led to the death of one man in Maryland [0] and an erroneous confiscation of one man in Florida [1] so far.
That first one sounds like someone that should have been red flagged--I wouldn't call that a failure of the system. The police were there, he had put the gun down and then picked it up again.
Yeah, family members said he wouldn't hurt anyone. It's very common for family members to side with abusers over victims.
The second, however, is the sort of problem that plague red flag laws.
> They are formal proceedings and due process of law.
A number of states involve no due-process prior to confiscation and require you to hire an attorney and file suit if your initial request for return of property are denied.
Having been "red flagged" by a vindictive ex, and in a "Red State" too boot, this is no joke.
I wonder if there might be a way to utilize the same effect that creates a Prince Rupert's drop to create that sort of stress in a superconductor. Sure, it would be fragile but it would also be stable without external forces applied. The stresses contained within the surface layer of the bulbous end reach as high as 700mpa which might be increased by using better materials and colder "shock" processes.
So the chiplet strategy is clearly paying dividends for AMD but I'm curious as to what has changed to have allowed this idea to be so effective? It's not like the concept of multi-die CPUs is new, Intel even implemented this on their legendary Q6600 CPU which was basically 2 Core 2 Duo dies on a single chip. The issue with the approach used with the Q6600 was that communication across cores on separate dies was orders of magnitude slower than communication across the cores sharing a die. Is AMD's success down to recent advancements in brand prediction and core scheduling optimization?
> The issue with the approach used with the Q6600 was that communication across cores on separate dies was orders of magnitude slower than communication across the cores sharing a die. Is AMD's success down to recent advancements in brand prediction and core scheduling optimization?
The biggest problem with the Q6600 is that it was a big hack to communicate over the frontside bus, something designed for nice slow memory access that didn't have the bandwidth or latency for inter-core communication.
Infinity fabric, on the other hand, is good enough that on Zen 2 they didn't even bother to directly connect the two CCX that share a die.
If I had to relate this to an HN related topic, I'd say this is closest to the theory of "technical debt". The further your code base moves away from the origin, the more difficult it is to address issues in the foundational code. Fudging around with the basic building blocks of life is extremely risky in an evolutionary perspective, gains can be made but they are going to be smaller (less advantageous) than gains possible by fudging around with top level code. By making base level changes, you effectively halt top level change until everything is proved out. By the time a base level change would have stabilized and the gains realized, the more nimble organisms making top level changes will have long since outcompeted the base changer into oblivion.
