> I am not the person you are asking, but (to me personally) it just says that Saudi Arabia had made massive strides to become a modern 21st century society, as opposed to some of their regional neighbors who still practice FGM on a notable scale.
That assumes that Saudis did use to do FGM.. and that's not true either.
> Let's call a cat: of these 230 mutilated women, a vast majority are muslims. There are 900 million muslim women on earth and nearly 1/4th of them have been mutilated by their community.
If the point here is that this is an Islamic/Muslim issue, then you'd find this in other Muslim populations. It's an Africa issue. Ethiopia is 60% Christian, yet had a 65 percent rate of FGM. Look at Pakistan, and the levant in general. Very Muslim populations yet very low levels of FGM.
> I am not a journalist and even I would question the "good journalism would include" assertion given the source provided.
You've misunderstood. I was saying good journalism would include both sides, and hopefully primary sources alongside the reporting, so readers can evaluate both.
> If the above is "overblown", then the SVP has done so. I have no evidence to believe this is the case however.
It says "at least one of those disruptions were tied to Amazon's AI coding assistant Q, while others exposed deeper issues." You initially cited this article as evidence that coding agents don't produce working code. But the SVP is describing a broader trend of deployment and control plane failures, most of which are classic infrastructure problems that predate AI tooling entirely. You're attributing a systemic operational failure to AI code generation when even your own source doesn't support that.
More fundamentally, your original argument was that the premise "software can write working code" is flawed. One company having incidents, where some of those incidents involved AI tooling doesn't prove that. Humans cause production incidents every single day. By your logic, the existence of any bug would prove humans can't write working code either.
> Much of the coverage of the service incidents has focused on a weekly Amazon Stores operations meeting and a planned discussion of recent outages. Reviewing operational incidents is a routine part of these meetings, during which teams discuss root causes with the goal of continuing to improve reliability for customers.
This is something that's a part of every FAANG afaik. I know for a fact that there's no prohibition on pushing AI-assisted code. How would that even technically work? It'd basically mean banning Kiro/CC from the company.
> Only one of the incidents involved AI-assisted tooling, which related to an engineer following inaccurate advice that an AI tool inferred from an outdated internal wiki, and none involved AI-written code.
and this doesn't seem as "AI caused outage" as it was portrayed.
> the US military has made contingency plans for a decapitation strike and seizure or destruction of nuclear weapons in Pakistan in case the situation turns really bad there. Real deterrence requires a credible second-strike capability on survivable platforms such as submarines.
The existence of a plan does not equate to the feasibility of its execution. A submarine-based deterrent is indeed the "gold standard" for survivability, but it is not the only standard. There is enough pain for the US that they wouldn't actually attack Pakistan.
Mainly because Islam has jurisprudence around hygiene in a sense. Ritual purification is an actual religious principle.
Islam requires Muslims to pray 5 times a day, and for those prayers, one has to be ritually clean. That involves washing the hands, rinsing the mouth and nose, washing the face, forearms, head, ears, and then the feet. That's effectively all the major parts of the body that are generally not covered by clothes. Your "cleanliness" is invalided if you use the toilet, pass flatulence, vomit, sleep and so on.
More so, for using the toilet, there are rules. You have to find a place that is away from standing water, people's pathways, shade etc ; granted, this generally doesn't apply in today's age. You have to be quiet on the toilet, and not look at anyone. Not allowed to eat any food while defecating. Lastly and most relevant in this case, you have to use water to wash yourself using the left hand, and then afterwards, you need to do the same for washing the front if you've urinated.
The reason why the "bidet spray" thing exists, is largely because of the rules in the religion around that practice. Calling them Arabic wouldn't make any sense because Indonesia, with the largest Muslim population, has similar tools in their facilities. Again, because they're mostly Muslims.
Printing isn't a catholic thing because the religious doctrine didn't emphasis "printing" itself.
Arabic numbers aren't "islamic numbers" because the religious doctrine didn't emphasise the numbers in some way.
> 1. A new UX/UI paradigm. Writing prompts is dumb, re-writing prompts is even dumber. Chat interfaces suck.
> 2. "Magic" in the same way that Google felt like magic 25 years ago: a widget/app/thing that knows what you want to do before even you know what you want to do.
and not to "dunk" on you or anything of the sort but that's literally what Descartes seems to be? Another wrapper where I am writing prompts telling the AI what to do.
It's a 14 year old kid. He wasn't demonstrating anything.
He took apart a clock, stuck in back in a different case, wanted to show his teacher that in a, I am guessing : "Hey look, I took all this apart, and managed not to destroy it"..
Honestly, this entire event shows me two things:
1. The jumps people make to crazy assumptions when faced with someone they don't like because of ideological reasons.
2. The low level of technological acumen/knowledge to assume that this is even similar to a dangerous device.
> The account creation process is free and takes just a few seconds. If you use Google to log in, you can access Raven immediately. For email sign-ups, you’ll receive a login link right away and it's just an extra click.
The average user leave web pages in 10-20 seconds unless you provide a clear value proposition to hold their attention.
I can make a account, and I can give you my email ... But why should I? What exactly even is Raven? The webpage tells me nothing, yet you think I am going to give over my email information (and name etc that's pulled from Google OAuth) ... for what again?
> We agree that having the option to try the app without creating an account would be ideal, and it's in our roadmap.
Not even that. Make a landing page. Stick a few screenshots on it, make a loom video. Anything that shows me what I am even signing up to.
More so, you're targeting developers, on HN. That's a more privacy focused crowd. No Privacy Policy. No contact information. No proof that my data won't be sold to some random company is not a great way to gain trust.
> blunt instrument like this is likely to kill off sponsorships as a whole
That's the dream. Ads are a poison and a blight.
Removing them is something many users, including me welcome. If one wants money for their videos, they're welcome to actually allow getting payments i.e. patreon, the "Youtube sponsorship"-thing.
Far more men like women with good-looking fit bodies. It's a statistically insignificant minority that likes "fat women", so "men" overall aren't policing women's bodies to the point of influencing women to not go to the gym. It's largely women who do it to each other.
It helps reinforce my overall belief, that people smart in some aspects of life, might be very un-smart/crazy/bigoted/ignorant etc in other parts of life.
I mean, look at the website, 7/10 of the "Recently Updated" are about religion, while most are about Islam. A religion that he categorically denies and thinks is false, yet is seemingly obsessed with? Strange stuff to me.
That assumes that Saudis did use to do FGM.. and that's not true either.