HN user
So: Since this is US centric:
- Is it better/worse than other countries? ... better/worse than "comparable" countries?
- What's the historical trend?
- And in both directions (geographical, historical): How does it relate to the respective diffences in wealth inequality?
Appleseed missing! But maybe it's more solarpunk?
Letting the agent rebase stacked PRs (and create the respective subtasks in jira to begin with) is an incredible time saver
It's been a few years (~ 15) since I read it.
The determinant trick I'm referring to is used in prop 2.4 (in the Version I found via Google).
They use the determinant of the adjugate matrix if I remember correctly... But they just hit the reader with this without any motivation or even naming it.
then that's a problem with the original question - not the solution itself
I think there's a good counterexample to this:
Atiyah/MacDonald proove the Nullstellensatz ultimately by using some trick involving determinants.
They give a very nice theoretical treatment of the content and context of the theorem. But the proof at one crucial point uses techniques that live conceptually outside of this context: While its possible to see that the argument is sound, it does not give a good explanation of _why_ it's true within the context of the theorem.
(You could of course argue that they did not give enough context ... but that's exactly my point: the trick makes the proof work but hides the explanation)
a human mathematician would aspire to
Some do. But there's also the notion that a clever trick is a bad explanation.
I think trying to iterate on a "spectral decomposition of your intent" - slowly working on increasinly refined breakdowns of what are the different aspects of your project are - both on the domain- and also the technical level; aka requirements and architecture. And then don't directly iterate on the code but rather regenerate/update the codebase based on the new intent and the old codebase... And a decomposition of the whole thing in terms of optics (open lenses, etc) where the decomposition respects the "spectral decomposition".
From the blog post:
A ProseMirror 2.0 with an incompatible interface would amount to the same but make it ambiguous what people mean when referring to ProseMirror. Trying to graft stuff on in a backwards-compatible way as an 1.x version would produce a compromised win32-style mess.
From the blog:
I'm not all that fond of the ProseMirror pun anymore either (it's CodeMirror but for prose, get it?)
So... It's time for someone to create Codegard, i guess?
or just ask an llm
The bad thing about this:
Can you trust future governments to respect "Nulla poena sine lege"?
If you look longer term, a society that does this will end up a lot poorer than one that doesn't.
Got data to back that up?
(On the serious level, I'm really curious; But on the polemic level I'll call BS - I highly doubt there ever was such a period in any capitalist country ever)
I like it;
But I think there's a middle ground: You can definitely use GenAI to bring yourself to the page.
But that requires effort that goes beyond "draw me a pelican riding a bicycle".
I've used to create abstract art/(or "images that look like abstract art" if you prefer - let's not get distracted by this branch of the discourse) using midjourney: getting the AI to output something worthwhile would usually take me hours of iterating over a prompt - entering a feedback loop until two things happen: first, congruence between your intent and the output (both change during iteration! ); second, the output stabilizes with growing prompt length. and so generating the output turns from a slot-machine into something deliberate and personal
(lots of caveats of course but i think it's a worthwhile perspective)
PS -- What I forgot to mention: Its usually a hard fight to get out of the slop zone; The midjourney models have very boring default aesthetics and styles of composition (insultingly boring!)
yeah... AI doesnt seem to make us more creative
and your orchestrating agent has permissions to add users?
Hm...the screenshots don't really sell it;
Maybe the authors should just vibe code a cljs port and put it in a browser?
And showcase some program written in this language that sells it better?
just give it its own Linux user
it's never "just" ...
(for example: how do you manage this across multiple isolated sessions?)
opening a browser is much easier
... and the entry barrier for non-linux people at your company is much much lower
... and the compliance barrier for companies is much much lower (how do you ensure that everyone creates the users correctly?)
So what?
This is about HTTP.
And it does not break REST: None of the HTTP constructs that REST is built on change due to the introduction of QUERY.
Yes: If you're doing QUERY, you're (potentially) not doing CRUD.
But this enables a clean way to do CQRS over HTTP.
I played it on a Pentium with 60mhz - it was allright
That's the whole point of the article:
"We show [Assuming {competing physics theory} then {P = NP}]"
(or something along the lines)
"But we actually think P != NP... so [Assuming {P != NP} then {competing physics theory} cant be true]"
This also shows that 2025 paid for 2024.
Unless they increased their spending even more, "all they have to do" is cover 2025 with the 2026 revenue?
but a few generations back
Out of interest: Was this still before CoT/thinking-mode became the norm?
To comment on the two sibling responses to my post here in parallel.
I think it gives very valuable insights to tackle the question: "What if we wanted to apply 'vibe-coding' as an SWE technique?"
There's a lot of interesting nuance to cover:
- How can we ensure that agents produce the codebases we want?
- How can we reduce the cognitive burden of code review?
- Do we actually need to review everything?
- How can we safely vibe-code in regulated environments (ISO 27001)?
- How can we use vibe-coding to safely evolve production-grade systems?
- ... etc, etc
I find this approach much more interesting than dismissing vibe-coding as non-SWE.
A vibe coder is someone who wants to test an idea by generating software as a prototype. A software engineer is someone who thinks about the entire software development lifecycle.
I don't think it's such a simple dichotomy; And dismissing the possibilites of agentic coding as inherently non-SWE is rather short-sighted: You CAN use agents as a software engineering tool.
It's just that it's often misaligned with the processes we're used to. But that does not mean that LLM-agents a bad tool.
This seems to be a good question for an the LLM of you choice. I've asked one and after some search:
Wholesale prices:
- Germany ~€0.089/kWh - Factor 2.94 to consumer Price
- France ~€0.061/kWh - Factor 2.92 to consumer price
- Spain. ~€0.065/kWh - Factor 2.82 to consumer price
The reason seems to be that this price is driven by the tech that is used to fill the gaps what demand is high.
And coal/gas make this expensive.
- Germany needs a lot of coal/gas at some times
- France has nuclear so less coal/gas is needed
- Spain just has a lot of renewables and needs way less coal/gas to compensate
So France is better off because of nuclear... But Spain is doing nearly as well with renewables.
It's also not a "two-pizza team" market.
Er... No?
Electricity prices in Germany are lower than last year.
https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/energiemonitor-strompreis-gas...
What is the point of taking pictures, really?
Ephemeral communication?
It's fun; Gets a group together; They touch for a moment; Look at it together; "Oh my good I look so fat"; ...
Isn't this just (roughly) John Searles Chinese Room argument repackaged?
But didn't even John Searle argue at this level when refuting the "systems response" to his chinese room argument?
Very simplified the refutal goes like this: "It would be silly to attribute consciousness to a room".
Ultimately, Searle is berating people for even arguing inside the very analogy he put up to make a point.
(... my key takeaway is that even very smart people get astonishingly dumb on this topic)