• 2 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle
  • 1000% this. Without giving away too much information, I work(ed) for a cloud provider (not one of the big ones, there are a surprising number of smaller ones in the field you’ve probably never heard of before). I quit this week to take a position in local government with some quaint, on-prem setup.

    1. We were always understaffed for what we promised. Two guys per shift and if one of us took vacation; oops, lol. No extra coverage, just deal.
    2. Everyone was super smart but we didn’t have time to work the tickets. Between crashes, outages, maintenance, and horrendous tickets that took way too much work to dig into, there was just never enough time. If you had a serious problem that took lengthy troubleshooting, good luck!
    3. We over-promised on support we could provide, often taking tickets that were outside of infrastructure scope (guest OS shit, you broke your own server, what do you want me to do about it?) and working them anyway to please the customer or forwarding them directly to one of our vendors and chaining their support until they caught wise and often pushed back.
    4. AI is going to ruin Support. To be clear, there will always be support and escalation engineers who have to work real problems outside the scope of AI. However without naming names, there’s a big push (it’ll be everyone before too long, mark it) for FREE tier support to only chat with AI bots. If you need to talk to a real human being, you gotta start dishing out that enterprise cash.

    Mix all that together and then put the remaining pressure on the human aspect still holding things up and there’s a collapse coming. Once businesses get so big they’re no longer “obligated” to provide support, they’ll start charging you for it. This has always been a thing of course, anyone who’s worked enterprise agreements knows that. But in classic corpo values, they’re closing the gap. Pay more for support, get less in return. They’ll keep turning that dial until something breaks catastrophically, that’s capitalism baby.




  • … I thought that … nevermind, this is why I’m here.

    The Elgato has a USB coming out of it and I thought that passing everything through it would allow the USB to feed/write the video stream without any other processing, I guess what I’ve really been after this whole time is more OBS tweaking.

    The only thing you might want to do is go into the video settings and set it to use NVENC (I think you can do that on Linux) to offload the encoding to your GPU (which has dedicated encoding hardware) instead of your CPU.

    I think this was a big missing piece for me.

    For all my years in IT, I’ve never been an A/V nerd.>



  • It is an opinion piece and I’m not gonna pretend it’s not heavily biased, but why shouldn’t it be? What are the reasons to own a Cybertruck when the whole intent of the product feels like a pro-Elon circlejerk?

    I’m an average consumer and shall we say, an Elon-disdainer. I don’t like the man, though I have better things to do with my time than actively hate him. At first glance, it does not appear to even be a truck. It’s wild and awful looking, it doesn’t sell itself at all on the visuals alone so it had better have killer features. Which are … ?

    Look, when you show up to my potluck with a literal crockpot full of shit, I don’t feel the need to entertain you. “Is that literal shit?” I ask. “It’s my grandmother’s recipe!” you reply. “Well that may be, but is it literal shit? In a crockpot? Cooking all day?” “You haven’t even tried it!”

    I don’t know why I have to justify not eating shit. Coming up with reasons not to blindly consume transparently bad products was not a position I felt I’d ever need to reason myself out of.

    EDIT: sorry if that came off sounding too critical of you, I don’t mean to attack you personally. But the shape of this discussion is a thorn in my side that sits at a particular junction between how we choose to see biases in media and modern consumerism and I think it warrants further investigation.


  • You’re getting downvoted by cryptobros, but you are absolutely correct, there is no good use for block chain and never will be

    It’s a fully public database among trustless parties. To the first point, there’s no reason any database can’t be made public if so desired. To the second point, for the block chain to have any meaning or value beyond itself, some authority eventually needs to interpret its contents. That authority might as well hold the database or, in trustless cases, a third party trustee. Nothing about it makes sense at a very base level, you don’t even need to explain the tech because it just doesn’t hold up logically.




  • I’m right there with you.

    Microsoft (and honestly a lot of mainstream software) has been slowly evolving over the years from providing robust, full-featured products that allow you build your own workflows to shipping things with an inherent “paradigm” or “ideology” on how they should be used. Mostly (unsurprisingly) to the ends of data collection, ad serving, and profit driving. Gross, gross, gross.





  • The original post was at least half joking in tone, but in seriousness, I think there’s an argument to be made that “posts” applies to topical threads. Threads that originate with a piece of content like a link or self post and that all following discussion is at least tangentially related. I’d call them posts here on Lemmy for that.

    Tweets, however, often originate out of thin air, be it someone’s head or ass. When someone says, “Kanye West ‘tweeted’ <INSERT OPINION HERE>” you’ve already determined about how seriously you’re going to take it.



  • Everything is tweets now, on all platforms; hear me out.

    It might sound lazy, and I certainly have no loyalty to the Twitter brand, but if Musk isn’t going to defend it we have the opportunity to dilute and generalize the term (like zipper or band-aid). We can kill it dead AND reclaim it.

    It’s a good word! Short, sweet, has familiarity, and is honestly pretty descriptive for the simple bird-like chatter of the discourse. Everything else proposed sounds dumb as hell, not to mention you’re doing the marketing for them. Don’t sell their brands - suffocate them!


  • It’s the one-two punch of “why wasn’t it already in place” and “very bad, slow communication” wrapped up in “a team that really should’ve known better already”. If any one of those had been different maybe the reaction wouldn’t’ve been so strong. This just isn’t what you want to see from a new service that’s hoping to take on the entrenched Twitter (no matter how rapidly it may be declining, holdouts will be strong) and the evil Threads (which jumped itself so far ahead in userbase through … shady tactics).

    At the end of the day, this is a product. We have a right to demand better service if they want us using it (how they make a profit isn’t our concern). This is the best time to strike too, and lay down the groundwork for what kind of community that we want to foster there. Sending a strong message that we want Twitter but without the bad stuff that made us leave is very important. Did some people take it even way too far? Probably maybe, but you should know by now being online that you can’t let the worst of everyone represent you.


  • Sorry, yes, still trying to wrap my head around it. It’s one of those things where there is quite obviously no direct benefit for the user. The company is trying to sell it as improving their content, moderation, security, etc. which may have indirect, knock-on effects for the end user but whether that would even be true or if it would be perceptible to your average person is MUCH more questionable.

    It’s the same kind of thing when you see people defending exclusivity on consoles. I mean sure, it helps prop up your favorite company/developer in hopes that the market benefit may someday come back around and help them to produce more content/games that you like, but people seriously need to start looking out after their own self interests first and corporations be damned. They earn money by providing actual value, don’t ever argue against yourself.


  • Maybe somebody can do a better job of boiling this down than I can.

    Basically, right now, if you ask for something on the internet, it gets served to you. Sure there are lots of server side protections that may require an account to log in to access things or what have you, but still you can at least request something from a server and get some sort of response in return.

    What this does is force attestation through a third party. I can ask for something from a server and the server turns to the attester and goes, “Hey, should I give this guy what he’s asking for?” and the attester can say “No” for whatever reasons it might. Or worse yet, I can get the attestation but the server can then decide based in turn that it doesn’t like me having that attestation and I get nothing.

    You can make arguments that this would be good and useful, but it’s so easy to see how this could go sideways and nobody with any sense should be taking Google or any of these large corporations at their word.


  • I still visit using the website in a desktop browser because I can’t help myself, but it’s noticeably different, even on subs like r/games where there was never a shutdown at all. The weekly “What have you been playing?” topic isn’t getting nearly the number of responses as it normally does, and those responses aren’t as well moderated. They used to be very good at keeping people on topic and formatting their posts with game title/system/etc. but all of that is getting a little sideways now, too.