Amazon said this week that it’ll begin using drones to deliver packages to some shoppers’ homes “within months,” AP’s Joseph Pisani reports.
Details: Amazon said its new drones use computer vision and machine learning to detect and avoid people or clotheslines in backyards when landing.
Powered by WPeMatico
Im nachfolgenden habe ich die Angebote aufgelistet, die ich für besonders spannend erachte. Darunter befinden sich hauptsächlich Tablets.
Bei den Onlineshops direkt könnt ihr euch aber auch aktuelle Deals anschauen. Über diese Links gelangt ihr direkt zu den Angebotsseiten der folgenden Shops:
Amazon Fire HD 10 für nur 99,99 Euro
Das Amazon Fire HD 10 ist das günstigste 10 Zoll Tablet, das ich mit reinem Gewissen empfehlen kann. Es bietet ein schickes FullHD-Display, ist solide gebaut, und die Leistung ist für gängige Aufgaben, aber auch einfache Spiele gut genug. Es eignet sich sehr gut als Netflix und Prime Video Tablet. Immer mal wieder ist das Fire HD 10 für richtig wenig Geld im Angebot – und das ist gerade der Fall. Amazon verkauft das Fire HD 10 derzeit für nur 99,99 Euro.
Lesen: Mein Amazon Fire HD 10 Test
Amazon Fire HD 8 für nur 64,99 Euro
Das Amazon Fire HD 8 ist eine kleinere Version des Fire HD 10. Auch hier gilt, dass das Tablet ein ziemlich gutes Preis/Leistungsverhältnis bietet. Das Fire HD 8 hat ein gutes 8 Zoll HD-Display, ist für gängige Aufgaben schnell genug, und eignet sich gut als Medien-Tablet. Anstatt 89,99 Euro kostet es gerade nur 64,99 Euro.
Lesen: Mein Amazon Fire HD 8 Test
Huawei MediaPad M5 10 für nur 279 Euro
Das Huawei MediaPad M5 10 ist ein Premium-Tablet, das zu den schnellsten Tablets auf dem Markt gehört. Wir bekommen ein sehr hochauflösendes 10 Zoll Display, ein hochwertiges Metallgehäuse, einen schnellen Octa-Core Prozessor, 4GB RAM, vier Lautsprecher und einen Fingerabdruckscanner. Trotzdem ist es gerade stark reduziert im Angebot – vermutlich wegen den Huawei News. Anstelle des UVP von 399 Euro kostet es bei Amazon gerade nur 279 Euro. Die 8 Zoll Version ist für nur 239 Euro im Angebot.
Huawei MediaPad T5 10 mit 3GB & 32GB nur 166 Euro
Das Huawei MediaPad T5 10 ist ein unteres Mittelklasse-Tablet, das trotz eines günstigen Preises eine sehr gute Leistung bietet. Zwar fehlen Premium-Features wie Fingerabdruckscanner, doch bekommen wir ein 10,1 Zoll FullHD-Display, ein Metallgehäuse, 3GB RAM und 32GB Speicher. Es gibt einen MicroSD-Kartenslot und das T5 10 ist für die meisten Spiele leistungsstark genug. Bei MediaMarkt ist es gerade für nur 166 Euro im Angebot.
Powered by WPeMatico
Anyone can do site reliability engineering (SRE). Sure, Google pioneered the practice, but you don’t have to work for a tech giant to use SRE to increase reliability and improve system performance. At Google’s 2019 Cloud Next conference, I sat down with Stephen Thorne, site reliability engineer on Google’s customer reliability engineering team and co-author of The Site Reliability Workbook, to talk about how organizations, both large and small, can use SRE to reduce operational costs, improve reliability, and create productive cross-functional teams.
During the interview, we covered strategies for getting started with SRE, including how to get buy-in from the whole team, from management to operations. We also talked about potential hurdles to implementing SRE; why postmortems should always be blameless; what success looks like for an SRE team; and best practices for reducing toil, measuring reliability, moving to the cloud, and more.
Here are some highlights from our conversation:
Getting buy-in from management
When we’re talking about how to get management buy-in, we see SRE as providing value. The value that SRE provides to a business might come in various different forms. It might be that you’re currently having problems with reliability, with your operational load, your operational costs. There is something you need to do in order to be able to scale up and be more effective in your environment. SRE allows you to say, “Are we reliable enough? And if we’re not, what are we going to do about it?”
Biggest roadblock to doing SRE
One of the things I see being a significant barrier is the psychological safety required in order to be confident working in production, and being responsible for production, and being responsible for engineering and production. At Google, we have this locked down. We’ve got the concept of blameless postmortems, but it’s not just that. You have this confidence that if you’re toiling too hard, you can go to your leadership and say, “Help.” And your leadership will say, “Absolutely. That’s a problem. We’ll help you drive that down.”
But in another organization, you might go to leadership and say, “Help, we have too much toil right now.” They might say, “Okay, so you’re going to work harder, aren’t you?” I think one of the things we have at Google, which I would love to see in more organizations, is the implementation and the feeling of psychological safety. That if you have problems, it’s not your fault that you have problems. You can go to leadership, you can go to your peers, you can go to your development teams, and you can say, “Let’s work together to make this a better place for everyone.”
Keeping the post-mortem blameless
The reason you really want a blameless postmortem is because as soon as you blame a system, or a human, or a thing that happened, you stop looking for all of those other causes for what went wrong.
Signs of a successful SRE team
What you want to see from a successful site reliability engineering team is that they know how reliable their system is. They have a plan for how to improve it over time, or reduce their toil over time; they’re delivering on that plan; and those deliverables are actually causing a change.
So, a successful SRE team is able to demonstrate the impact of the work they’re doing. If you have an SRE team that was running a reliable service last year and running a reliable service this year, but can’t tell you what projects they completed in that time that actually had a measurable impact, it’s like, what are we doing here?
Is it possible to automate yourself out of a job?
If you find SREs who have actually managed to automate themselves out of a job, you have struck gold. Because they now know how to do this for other teams, they know how to scale up their work, and you should grab onto these people with both hands and say, “You are the best SREs we have right now. Help everyone else achieve your success.”
This post is a part of a collaboration between O’Reilly and Google. See our statement of editorial independence.
Powered by WPeMatico
In What’s the Future, Tim O’Reilly argues that our world is governed by automated systems that are out of our control. Alluding to The Terminator, he says we’re already in a “Skynet moment,” dominated by artificial intelligence that can no longer be governed by its “former masters.” The systems that control our lives optimize for the wrong things: they’re carefully tuned to maximize short-term economic gain rather than long-term prosperity. The “flash crash” of 2010 was an economic event created purely by the software that runs our financial systems going awry. However, the real danger of the Skynet moment isn’t what happens when the software fails, but when it is working properly: when it’s maximizing short-term shareholder value, without considering any other aspects of the world we live in. Even when our systems are working, they’re maximizing the wrong function.
Charlie Stross makes a similar point in “Dude you broke the future,” arguing that modern corporations are “paper clip maximizers.” He’s referring to Nick Bostrom’s thought experiment about what could go wrong with an artificial general intelligence (AGI). If told to maximize the process of making paper clips, it could decide that humans were inessential. It was told to make paper clips, lots of them, and nothing is going to stop it. Like O’Reilly, Stross says the process is already happening: we’re already living in a world of “paper clip maximizers.” Businesses maximize stock prices without regard for cost, whether that cost is human, environmental, or something else. That process of optimization is out of control—and may well make our planet uninhabitable long before we know how to build a paper clip-optimizing AI.
The paper clip maximizer is a provocative tool for thinking about the future of artificial intelligence and machine learning–though not for the reasons Bostrom thinks. As O’Reilly and Stross point out, paper clip maximization is already happening in our economic systems, which have evolved a kind of connectivity that lets them work without oversight. It’s already happening in our corporations, where short-term profit creates a world that is worse for everyone. Automated trading systems largely predate modern AI, though they have no doubt incorporated it. Business systems that optimize profit—well, they’re old-fashioned human wetware, collected in conference rooms and communicating via the ad-hoc neural network of economic exchange.
What frustrates me about Bostrom’s paper clip maximizer is that focusing on problems we might face in some far-off future diverts attention from the problems we’re facing now. We don’t have–and may never have–an artificial general intelligence, or even a more limited artificial intelligence that will destroy the world by maximizing paper clips. As Andrew Ng has said, we’re being asked to worry about overpopulation on Mars. We have more immediate problems to solve. What we do have are organizations that are already maximizing their own paper clips, and that aren’t intelligent by any standard. That’s a concrete problem we need to deal with now. Talking about future paper clips might be interesting or thrilling, but in reality, it’s a way of avoiding dealing with our present paper clips. As Stross points out, Elon Musk is one of the recent popularizers of paper clip anxiety; yet, he has already built his own maximizers for batteries and space flights. It’s much easier to wax philosophical about a hypothetical problem than to deal with a planet that is gradually overheating. It’s a lot more fun, and a lot less threatening, to think about the dangers of a hypothetical future AI than to think about the economic, political, sociological, and environmental problems that face us now—even if those two sets of problems are really the same.
The argument that Stross and O’Reilly make is central to how we think about AI ethics—and not just AI ethics, but business ethics. I’m not terribly concerned about the things that could go wrong with an artificial general intelligence, at least in part because we won’t get the chance to worry about AGI if we don’t deal with the problems we have in the present. And if we do deal with the problems facing us now, Tim O’Reilly’s Skynet moment and Stross’s present-day paper clip maximizers, we will inevitably develop the tools we need to think about and manage the future’s paper clip maximizers. Getting our present systems back under control and contributing to human welfare is the only way to learn how to keep our future systems, whatever they might be, working for our collective good.
I can think of no better way to prepare for the future’s problems than to solve the present’s.
Powered by WPeMatico
- Visual Studio Code Remote Development May Change Everything (Scott Hanselman) — Visual Studio Code Remote Development allows you to use a container, remote machine, or the Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) as a full-featured development environment. It effectively splits VS Code in half and runs the client part on your machine and the “VS Code Server” basically anywhere else. […] As I mentioned, you can run within WSL, containers, or over SSH. It’s early days, but it’s extraordinarily clean. I’m really looking forward to seeing how far and effortless this style of development can go. There’s so much less yak shaving! It effectively removes the whole setup part of your coding experience and you get right to it.
- PWA Universal Builder — scaffolding for Progressive Web Apps with your choice of frameworks, get optimizations and presets for free.
- A Study of More Than 250 Platforms Reveals Why Most Fail (HBR) — We grouped the most common mistakes into four categories: (1) mispricing on one side of the market, (2) failure to develop trust with users and partners, (3) prematurely dismissing the competition, and (4) entering too late. As always, the four categories aren’t significant—how do you go broke? You run out of money by failing to keep enough of it, or by never getting enough users to have enough money in the first place. The individual tales are where juicy stories and interesting thoughts form.
- Friday Wins and a Case Study in Ritual Design (Kellan Elliott-McCrea) — A standard piece of software development practice that many teams let lapse, or merely let lapse into being sub-optimal, is “Friday wins,” sometimes called sprint demos or sprint reviews. But you can take what can be a flaccid and repetitive meeting and make it a valuable ritual by grounding it in values.
Powered by WPeMatico