This is such an American take diametrically opposed to reality. You literally could not be more wrong. The correlation between "effort to fight market forces (i.e. protectionism" and "independence from US tech) is 1:1. It's China, then Korea, then the rest of the world which is all 100% dependent on US tech. China is independent entirely thanks to protectionism and banning right from the staft, Korea is inbetween thanks to the exact same.
The only thing that works is throwing up huge barriers against dumping. This is the norm for physical goods. US big tech, and really Silicon Valley, is based on dumping - burning VC cash to become a monopoly. This is not a hair better for a domestic industry than being flooded by physical goods that are cheap thanks to burning through (let's say Chinese) government cash. In the latter we love to call this "artificiallly cheap", though for some reason I've never heard this adjective used for US tech based on monopolizing by burning VC cash.
Of course, the DST should be instated ASAP regardless of what the US does - not having one is completely absurd in this day and age, one needs domestic industry to survive as a country (or federation) and that doesn't happen with 0% tarriffs, which is what "no DST" is the equivalent of for tech.
"Things are going to be so much better when we needlessly make them shittier."
WTF Americans. We will do anything to just be chill with this crap. I don't know about you, but in school when I was lazy and waited for the last minute and did my work purely out of pressure I did not, in fact, do better work, and got worse outcomes (a worse grade than I normally got).
Germany is the most contradicdory country I know of, and such a huge warning flag to anywhere else. For decades, half of children's education has been spent on hammering in "Never Again". Surely there are two huge lessons to learn there: 1. Do not judge the value of people based on their biological characteristics they were born with 2. "I was just following orders" is not an excuse, and one needs to instead do what is right regardless of protocol.
There is no European country which does a worse job at both of these. Germany is easily the number one country in the world for "protocol is everything". It doesn't matter how detrimental and damaging the rules are, the rules are the rules, and they must be followed. This case is the millionth example. The rules are interpretable as it being illegal to access data with a publically available password using this password, so we're going to apply them, despite it being patently absurd. For the first point, German's reponse to Gaza (the slowest in all of the West) said everything.
German government and courts are as opportunistic as everywhere else. German government ignores EU laws (ex: water protection), its own courts (ex: air pollution court orders, time record keeping for teachers) and worker protection (ex: false self employment of music teachers).
Very sad, for all their marketing around EU, GDPR, privacy and so on. I feel dumb for having fell for it a little.
This is a big reason why there are so few EU tech startups, they get bought out if they're doing well, more and more consolidation in tech, more and more "exits".
Correct! Will be moving away immediately for this reason.
Or well, technically incorrect, as someone will surely point out. US companies can be legally compliant with GDPR, it's just that the likes of the CLOUD Act and FISA make it completely meaningless.
Before anyone comes in talking about how it's farfetched that those matter, it's 100x as far-fetched that self-hosted Chinese LLM models would exfiltrate your data (you can even airgap them) yet 90% of corporate America is avoiding them based solely on the country they were trained in. Compared to that insanity, above US acts are a very real threat.
And that's of course on top of that now an adversarial state's company has the power to immediately dissolve Langfuse.
Ive used Langfuse. It's completely unrelated to tools like Langchain and Autogen. It's just logging/tracing for LLMs. Sure they added stuff like "prompt management" and "epxeriments" etc. probably to keep investors happy but those are entirely optional sidedishes.
The tools you mentioned are indeed to be avoided. I trialed them early on and quickly realized in 99.9% they do nothing but bog you down. Pretty sure they'll be dead sooner rather than later.
I've worked at a company using it. Wrote this below.
> Probably mostly just people who work at companies that bought their software and know it's not special. It's a souped up version of Databricks. If you've worked with it it's always a laugh to see both their supporters on X who drank their koolaid, bought their stock and think it's some kind of one-of-a-kind magic, as well as people on places like HN who think they're data brokers. I guess HN is 90% people who have only worked in pure play tech plus academia. If you have any friends at Boeing, Airbus, Citibank, ask them if they've used it. Ironically most of it runs on the clouds from the average HNer's workplace, big enterprise contracts with AWS and Azure.
What you wrote here was accurate:
> the vendor is good at navigating the sales and compliance labyrinth to secure deals.
The main advantage they had over other platforms was really granular permissioning, which execs love the idea of and always scores great on box-ticking exercises.
You know who's collecting all this data the gov is shoving on Palantir's platform? Flock (YC S17) - of this very platform everyone in this thread is currently commenting on and boosting engagement of. Having most of these comments on news.ycombinator.com is peak irony.
What other Databricks providers are designing “daddy’s home” style apartment complex bombing target solutions, in order to have AI provide 100x more targets per day than human processes were able to achieve? I understand such tech is not magical to achieve but I don’t believe that’s the accusation
Are they designing it, or is the DOD - sorry, the Department of War that you're likely paying your taxes towards - designing it on their platform? As mentioned, who is providing the data necessary for such applications? For ICE, which this thread is about, it's clearly the likes of news.ycombinator.com's Flock (S17). Whether they put it in a simple Postgres instance or on Databricks or on Palantir's platform or on Microsoft Fabric, I think that's much less core than whose gathering and providing the data.
The only thing that works is throwing up huge barriers against dumping. This is the norm for physical goods. US big tech, and really Silicon Valley, is based on dumping - burning VC cash to become a monopoly. This is not a hair better for a domestic industry than being flooded by physical goods that are cheap thanks to burning through (let's say Chinese) government cash. In the latter we love to call this "artificiallly cheap", though for some reason I've never heard this adjective used for US tech based on monopolizing by burning VC cash.
reply