Underseat subs should get you pretty close, if that's a priority. My home theater seats came with them, but you have to pay extra for the driver(s). Maybe eventually, the single big sub seems fine so far.
I agree, but there's degrees (no pun intended!). Many PhDs are just an advisor telling a student exactly what to do. The training is still valuable, but it's not really what a PhD is "supposed" to mean. The example I give because of familiarity is many PhDs in chemistry/physics are just clicking run on simulations + running predefined analysis with results already predicted by the PI. Or in chemistry specifically OChem wet lab, it's often basically a minimum wage factory job.
I often let Claude write my commit messages even when I'm the one who wrote the code. Claude is often damn good at writing commit messages, and they frequently end up much better than if I wrote it all by hand. I nearly always edit them somewhat, but it's like starting from 80% instead of 0%. Some might call it laziness, but I call it working smarter rather than harder.
Fair enough. Primeagen did a video recently renouncing his love of Go over the concerns you've raised.
That said, I'm assuming much of this "wobbly" functionality will live in libraries and will not be common in day to day coding (much as I've seen with generics so far). It's all optional after all.
I use Go because it's simple, capable, and been my prime language for over a decade and that skill enables me to be valuable enough for a decently paying job.
If I were younger with more energy and time on my hands I'd likely be a rustacean but I think I can ride out my career on this. YMMV.
I agree. And at the same time I see that I can't solve this problem for all products. I want to check if it is possible to make one product where immutability is built in as an idea. And it is always available for sale. I will start with a T-shirt. If it works, then we can think about the rest.
> Colour-wise, the full Rec. 2020 gamut/space is available—though we weren’t shown any films/trailers that actually made use of this larger colour space; they all used the DCI’s standard P3 colour space.
This just made me think: if Anthropic or OpenAI wanted to get some good will, and burn a bunch more investor funding, they'd provide security audits for the most popular N AUR packages for free as a good-will service.
The interesting thing for me is that I have a very easy time of identifying AIslop. Have I been conditioned to simply ignore or accept humanslop? Is that the direction this is all going? That at some point we will simply accept both as a product of the human existence?
Their router classified prompts into difficulty buckets. This obviously won't work. Consider a senior developer routing work based only on the task description. Clearly you need to dig a bit deeper into the task.
Saying routers don't work is sort of like saying serverless doesn't work. It depends on when and how!
One routing implementation that recently launched here is interesting (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49099143). It routes based on the models' initial trajectories. This is like having multiple developers get started, seeing what they're doing, then pulling all but one off the project. It should work, but doesn't seem ideal!
I've gotten routing working well for typical chatbot prompts in http://pellmell.ai. This is fine because prompts are easy to classify into category buckets (for example: legal, medical, general knowledge, code). And models definitely have strengths and weaknesses. You want Gemini to answer General Knowledge and you want Claude to answer coding.
Fundamentally, the issue, IMHO, is that we need to decide as a society that should someone (anyone) have access to neural networks that can launch a successful cyberattack by discovering new zero-days and/or leveraging knowledge about recent zero-days and applying it in an adversarial way.
I think, the answer so far that we de-facto settled on, as a society, is yes. These foundation models have access to such systems.
Seems like this would have been much easier if you used plain old caffeine pills at the denominations you wanted to work thru, easier to measure (split the tablets) and also removes the other pleasurable aspects like flavor of the coffee and pleasing aromas—those kind of subjective cues that compound the preference and addiction
You can always get together, cleanse the code of any IP entanglements, and compete with the company that just fired you. Calls like this one are a good time to suggest it--even if only to make them squirm.
There are subtle things like abusing how github handles forks which can make malicious PKGBUILD a matter of just changing the rev with no hint in the file itself.
I love the references to a massive sporting culture in America while talking about a sport that has an order of magnitude more fans than there are Americans on the planet.
Your point about salary caps is interesting. It is good that we have these because otherwise you’d see something crazy, like the Dodgers simply buying a winning team with heretofore unseen amounts of money
The beauty of go is YAGNI. Language design makes it much harder for people so do stupid and cute things.
During my design process if I start realizing that I’m missing maps, More expressive Types, Or more complex polymorphism. I ask myself if I really need those things.
If I really do. I move off of go.
That’s the beauty of the language. Go does not need more complicated language features because it’s can handle the majority of trivial software work without unnecessary complexity.
The language does not need to solve complicated problems.
I'll come out and say it, heavily AI-assisted. First rust project, and wanted to dive on in with something that I'd been wanting to make. Lots of iteration, almost entirely free opencode tier models and agentic edits. I know what behavior I'm looking for though, and rust is pretty good at finding obvious errors (clippy too). It's not a production app, and it's just for fun, so ya. :)
