I think the problem is that too many people use AI to write bullshit. Thus AI writing becomes a cue for bullshit.
For people who have internalized AI writing as a cue for bullshit, it is very difficult to read obvious AI writing without constantly being cue-ed that the thing they're reading is bullshit. Even if it's not.
> If something is not in scope for your responsibility, obviously you must ask for permission.
Agree, but this can often be blurry.
> If it's in some weird edge case where you "feel" it is "in scope for your position" but you "want a bit of reassurance", then pick a lane.
I disagree here. I think there are often cases where this really functions as an "FYI" and is helpful. You are not shifting responsibility to the other party, but do...
* CYA if they say they weren't informed
* Get an opportunity for feedback without stalling progress in the case that they don't respond
IaC (capturing desired state declaratively) is a no-brainer for things like cloud resources IMO. Most use IaC for non-compute resources (e.x. DBs) and K8s for containerized compute workloads.
> But less so uniformity, since all providers are different
People sometimes misinterpret tools like Terraform supporting different vendors/hyperscalers as it providing a unified abstraction layer above them. As you note, it does not.
I simply fail to understand why automatic drift correction is considered important in this space. Cloud resources do not magically change themselves. Folks often cite rogue engineers making changes, but I prefer to deal with this scenario by whacking people with a stick and/or limiting access. Automatic drift correction can actually complicate making legitimate emergency changes to managed infrastructure.
This may be true, but from an editorial perspective they are openly and aggressively anti-Tesla. I think it's worth noting as this article is Tesla related.
LVT is a tax on the value of the land specifically, not a traditional property tax. This encourages development on valuable land that is currently being put to unproductive uses.
For example, if you own a lot in a downtown metro which is a parking lot you pay low property taxes because parking lots have low property values. You are disincentivised to develop it because your property tax would go up. Opposite incentives with a LVT.
I agree that more personal growth can be taken from reviewing other's behavior rather than analysis of their "overall morality". However, when people are powerful and their actions effect many people it is very important to reflect on the morality of their actions.
Holding powerful people and institutions to account for the morality of their actions can and has been a powerful force for good.
You are clearly describing "villainizing" people or groups. This is actually the opposite of moralism, which would be criticizing specific violations of morals.
Moralism can make people see things without nuance (i.e. saying "stealing is bad" with no regard for the context). This must be tempered. But this is not a good reason to throw out the pursuit of shared moral values within society.
I find this a profoundly odd response to the story. Is your intent to excuse her abusive treatment by the religious, medical, and government authorities of a totalitarian regime?
Your comment is treating her with full agency (i.e. "she shouldn't have done anything bad or disruptive") and completely ignoring the agency of the institutions that harmed her (i.e. "what did she expect in response?").
For people who have internalized AI writing as a cue for bullshit, it is very difficult to read obvious AI writing without constantly being cue-ed that the thing they're reading is bullshit. Even if it's not.