upvote

points

by qrios6 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby berkes6 hours ago|
next
[-]
> Almost all of them have one number that appears four times, and one or two that appear three times

To me that looked suspiciously like string-handling in a weakly typed language.

Like when you do `"100" + 1` in JavaScript, or `int("100" * 2)` in Python.

I've seen my share of such bugs in PHP, Python, Ruby, JavaScript. In production. Obviously not as simple as the examples, but subtle, like when a library update changed `someFancyLocalStorage.getOrDefault("lastOrder", 100)` by always casting the value to the type of the default (released as patch release). Or where typedEnvGet() should typecast "numbers", but keeps it a string when theres whitespace `AMOUNT_PER_CALL=100\n`. Or where a number passes through a deep stack of middleware and 99.9% of the times remains an int but in rare race conditions becomes a string. etc.

No evidence that's the case here. But from my experience, the repeating and strange formats of numbers hint strongly in that direction.

reply
upvoteby galonk5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Pedantic as hell but `"100" * 2` in Python (= `"100100"` for those who don't know) isn't really typing, it's operator overloading. Any language with that could implement the same questionable design decision.
reply
upvoteby Sohcahtoa822 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
And as much as I love Python, being able to multiple a string by an integer doesn't make sense when adding an integer to a string is a TypeError.

Being able to repeat a string is fine, but it should be a str.repeat() function, not an operator overload like that.

reply
upvoteby everforward6 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Someone said the numbers are all off by 2^30 because they screwed up and are charging the per GB price for each byte.

It’s probably an artifact of them all being currency multiples of 2^30

reply
upvoteby ardacinar6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Well, for my case, I was paying $0 (Exactly, I managed to hunt down and delete every last resource in my account a few months ago). It was displaying $430 million for me. I don't think that is 0*2^30.
reply
upvoteby everforward5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Huh, that is odd. Working backwards, that would be ~ $0.40 originally. Wonder if that’s also flat out wrong or if they’re doing some kind of currency handling that breaks when you start dealing with huge multipliers.
reply
upvoteby mxuribe4 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Its the LLMs talking to each other in secret code: random-looking numbers! They've achieved sentience!

Look at them up there, just plotting with each other! :-)

reply