Quothling

It's not your fault that I've become unclutured. If my wife had read it she would've never thought twice about which Godot it was. Kind of fun to think about how things change though. I don't think my children will read the play in school like I did, so perhaps the game engine being named after it (I assume it is) will mean they learn about it that way?

I'm not from the USA so my views are obviously biased by this. I very much doubt Epstein committed suicide, and it's been wild to watch you guys deal with it, not releasing the files, holding nobody accountable and so on. That being said, I also don't think there needs to be a big dark secret to explain why someone caught in the USA justice system would commit suicide.

It's crazy that you could face 35 years in jail for trying to free knowledge in a harmless manner. The longest anyone has been imprisoned for in my country in modern times is 26 years, 11 months and 6 days. We have a few people posed to break that record. Peter Lundin has been in prison for 25ish years, and him and Peter Madsen (the discount elon musk turned murderer who killed some poor journalist in is selfmade submarine) are contenders to people who will probably go beyond 35 years.

Not that our system is perfect. I think we're far too lenient on some crimes, but risking 35 years in jail for downloading and sharing academic knowledge... That's objectively evil.

I am so uncultured that I was wondering why on earth we were waiting for Godot... But it's of couse because it's THAT Godot and not the game engine.

However, having a high affinity with hardware is not a driver / computer science of hiring decisions from what i can see in the enterprise software world

I think the way I worded it was maybe a little too close to just being about hardware, because performance do matter a lot in the energy industry. I do think it applies to SWE in general. You mention .NET and I've met C# developers with years of experience who couldn't tell you the difference between IEnumerable and IQueryable. I've met even more experienced Python developers who don't know what a generator is. Stuff like that, not having knowledge of the tools they use. I guess you could argue that those are bad developers, but I don't personally think that has been the case for most of them. Still, you'd rather have someone who thinks about these things rather than eventually using batches once they run into memory issues.

I also think these changes are appearing faster in non SWE enterprise. As you said, product owners who are AI explorative (for the lack of a better word) are rock stars. We see this a lot in our finance and risk departments, where domain experts now write fairly decent software with AI. My team has build them tools so that they build things the same way, use the same developer setups and pull the pre-approved external packages or are offered alternative ways of doing things. A few years ago this would've been done by these domain experts "ordering" the software they needed from our SWE team, and if they hadn't already been mostly laid off due to Putin's invasion of Ukraine changing the markets, I belive they would've been now because of AI.

Because frankly, a lot of the software that gets produced in these areas, don't need computer science, until it does, and the domain experts can make the software they need so much faster than before by vibe coding it. From my perspective it's not that much of a difference in the quality of the code that gets produced. I also had to help with performance and security when we had more software engineers on staff. Though now I do it more through writing and distributing AI agent applications rather than writing a C binary or optimising the code directly.

This was sort of what I wanted to say, but I guess I should have worded it differently. I certainly didn't mean to say that I thought AI would stop improving. If anything I'm surprised at how much we have to fight the AI models to do what NASA has been doing for 60(?) years.

I'm from Denmark and I've been an external examiner for various CS educations for the previous 13 years now. Some of them teach you a lot about how the hardware works, others mainly teach you design patterns. Five years ago the latter was in high demand, because a lot of software development frankly doesn't need computer science (until it does). Now there is almost no demand for them.

We're also at the point where you can roll out context to your entire organisation. I created an app for our m365 Cowork and deployed it to everyone who develops software. It does a couple of things, but it main knows our compliance policies and can guide developers through writing the documentation needed for NIS2 compliance. It also guardrails against non-approved packages, and helps developers find alternatives, or if none can be reasonably found, how to get a new package/dependency approved (or rejected).

A few months back this would be something every developer kind of did on their own. Maybe they shared skills, we certainly encouraged it and tried to do all the change management things, but nobody really had the same versions of the skills. Which was horrible in the deployment pipelines, something like the compliance documentation often had to go back and forth several times before it could be approved. Now it's just there, for everyone.

In a year or two, I expect a lot of these things to have become even more standardized. So that we don't even really have to build our own apps, but can simply use the ones in the catalog with minimal configuration (and that config will likely only be necessary because I'm from a tiny country that nobody will maintain standards for).

Around here AI isn't really more of a threat to juniors than it is to seniors. It's a threat to the people who have been taught "recipies" rather than applied computer science. You can have excellent seniors who can do TDD, DRY, SOLID and so on, who also happen to have no idea what a L1 cache miss is. The current AI models know all of those things, but they struggle applying them correctly without someone piloting them. Even in the energy industry where I work, where you'd think it would be obvious from the context that you should prioritize runtime safety over debug safety, the current AI models struggle to do so. As far as seniority goes, though. If we can find a young developer with little experience who actually knows computer science, we're much more likely to hire them... Since they are cheaper.

This isn't something which is unique to software development though. We're currently building enterprise AI apps that we can deploy into the AI agents working for anyone of our employees. The key thing we're currently seeing is that the people in a team who are the ones that everyone turn to for advice, are the only people who aren't in "danger". Even people who are great at their jobs are being outperformed by AI in many cases.

I think it'll be a massive challenge for our society in the coming years. Maybe we're even going to get to the point where the AI will also be capable of replacing a lot of the "domain experts". Right now that seems far out, but then, if you had asked me about AI four months ago I would've told you it was all hype.

Usenet was(is?) moderated similar, to IRC, Discord and so on with some newsgroups needing moderator approval for every single post. Also, there was a lot of drama on Usenet. I don't think it's that different from the fediverse. I guess you could debate whether moving your "personality" from one fediverse server to another when is worse than having to use a new email to access groups that banned you. With the fediverse you can certainly be punished for the actions of other people on your instance much easier compared to other platforms.

Email is probably the closest to anarchy. If you could get people to use it for group communications, every user could decide who they include in their "reply all", which would probably lead to absolute chaos.

You're right, landsbytosse doesn't not translate well. To be fair the literal translation is village fool, which isn't much better. It's meaning would be more along the lines of village eccentric, which could be the village idiot, but not always.

Your most expensive users consuming $1,000 dollars a month doesn't matter in the budget?

An average employee cost around $30000 a month in my country. So it would be 3.3% in the budget for this single employee. I looked up average cost on a company our size and an IT budget of 5mil in Microsoft expences, and a max AI spending limit on 150k across the organisation would be a 5% increase of the IT budget on Microsoft services. Please note that these numbers are not ours, but averages from organisations in my area of the world.

Now I can say that the IT budget is one of the smaller budgets in non-tech enterprise. The cost of a 5% increase in the budget would not even trigger the audit margin for error in the big picture. I don't think you're necessarily wrong about the FOMO. I think that for many organisations this level of spending might trigger questions about why we aren't spending more.

This is the difference between small companies and enterprise. I once worked in a place that spent a million a year on unused Adobe licenses. The c-levels didn't even send an acknowledging reply to the email sent informing them it had been shut down.

I think the fatalism comes from having done a lot in our personal lives to live more sustainable, voting for green politics (in Europe you can find those everywhere on the political spectrum). You'll even find a "if it's yellow let it mellow" sign in the bathroom of a lot of my coworkers homes. Yet seing little impact because of how we as a global society continue to burn the planet. I know my fatalism comes from this.

I think you will find that a lot of people find that to be a feature of the federated networks. It's how society works outside of social networks. You aren't likely to see football fans of different teams sharing pubs here in Europe. You wouldn't see judgemental people be allowed in accepting roleplaying communities and so on. Why would a network of community controlled servers be any different than this? IRC was like this, Discord is like this. When you give people control they are going to kick out the opinions and people they don't want around.

If you find yourself on the outside, it might just be that you're the village idiot. Before SoMe platforms like twitter, facebook and other places without local moderation the village idiot didn't have much of a voice either.

I've worked with C# for a decade, and Go for the past 5ish years and I think the biggest difference between them is in the philosophical design on implicity and explicity. I have a strong dislike for C# like languages these days, but it's not for technical reasons. I think C# is supperior to Go in many ways, but I absolutely hate the implicity in it's design, and this is a personal opinion that is not objective. In this context I can't imagine how you would create a mix of the two that wouldn't violate either approach. Looking at something like this:

@DllImport("libc", EntryPoint: "strlen", CharSet: CharSet.Ansi)

I would argue that they made something I suspect many Go developers will dislike. I know I absolutely hate it. If I wanted to do things like that I might as well use C#. Then again, these days I'm shifting more and more of my development to either Python (which is objectively an awesome language that also sucks) or Rust. While one of my favorite features of any programming language is the Go modules with single folders and upper and lower cases for private/public. I am becoming a fan of how rust does structs with impl methods.

Anyway...

I think the environmental aspect is interesting and worth discussing. Around the offices the common joke is that people will "just burn down a piece of the rainforest" when they fire up their AI to solve some complex problem. Which certainly isn't what the world needs right now, and you can't have the "tool" without also the massive water consumption in a world where not everyone has access to clean water. Though as the fatalism in the burning down the rainforest implies, people around here have sort of accepted that the world is going to get hot.

On the other hand. If we apply the same sort of fatalism to AI, then we can expect AI to lead to civil uprising and a world which will probably be a lot more sustainable once most of us are dead.

I don't think the automation is any different from what we've seen the past 150 years. Except that perhaps this time AI is the tool which is actually going to do to the office what the assembly line did to the factory.

We get UV to generate a requirements.txt and then use the Python and Pip which is available on the official Microsoft container images we use for Azure container apps once it hits production. I've never had any issues with the build system in development though.

UV, Ruff and Pyrefy and you're set. As someone who works with Python, Typescript and C/Zig quite a lot I don't disagree with you on Typescript, but I'm not sure why you'd pick Typescript over Python. Bun is kind of awesome, but it's also kind of unfinished, but if you go with the default Node I find that the setup for security compliance is next to impossible where Python can do most things with it's standard library, a pandas and pyarrow.

I personally prefer the fake typing in Python because it fits well with our defensive programming style with very low abstraction and little to no adherence to DRY. Since Python naturally force you to deal with runetime assertions rather than getting you to do compiletime checks that then don't actually offer any form of safety at runtime. Which is obviously not a very technical argument, but it just feels a lot cleaner rather than having to juggle the two.

I'm not sure there is any value in knowing shit about AI. I know quite a lot about enterprise organisation level AI, but really, you could just ask an AI and it'd guide you through the processes. Knowledge in general is going to become real cheap in the age of AI. I've been a data archtiect in the past, so I used Opus 4.8 as I would've used a consultant agency on how to do our data architecture for multiple standard systems which can't directly share data with eachother. After a couple of hours with it as a sparring partner, I had some pretty awesome powerpoint decision making slides, one for c-levels and one for it-management.

Since our owners also own an IT consultant agency, I ran the same process through with one of our regular consultants who is an actual awesome data architect. The output was strikingly similar, well except that I/we didn't need to make the slides. I then had him run over the actual slides, and all we changed was adding a { between some arrows to make the source of the arrows more clear.

We're still going to use real human consultants in the loop because they are readily and freely available, and because this is still new. I doubt we'd want to spend 100 consultant hours on something like this in 5 years though. I mean, we'd still do it for decisions where we'd want someone to blame.

How about the dependencies Bun is pulling?

What dependencies? OpenSSL, libc or?

segfaults

Those would not be a compliance issue though.

I think it does. I know this is through Microsoft, but they give you a month free of Cowork which is currently Opus 4.8 (or at least they did for us) and I doubt we'd ever go back. When I say "we" it's the enterprise organisation "we", but this also where this sort of spending won't stop anyone. I can't go into exact details, but if our first month had not been free, then our most expensive user would've hit around $1000, while our average (among users who've adopted it and actually use it) is around $100. Neither of those numbers would matter in a budget.

I've had the pleasure of setting up limits because Microsoft needed billing policies before our C-levels have even gotten it on their agenda. So I set up a sort of conservative $200 personal limit, but then setup a $1m shared limit pool that anyone can be moved into with management approval. I suspect our limits will be much higher than this once the C-levels make the decision on an actual company policy. I think we'll see these spending limits mainly used as guardrails to prevent accidental spending, but that there will not really be a ceiling, just some approval gates. Some managers are already requesting usage reports, but not to track spending, they want to see who uses too little AI.

This is the difference between enterprise and small companies and individuals. When you spend $500k a month keeping your toilets stacked with papertowels, toiletpaper, soap etc. then $1m a month on AI isn't going to raise any eyebrows.

I think orchestration is the perfect description. In enterprise you have a bunch of standard systems which play by their own tune, and even with a lot of the "low-code" options you're going to build systems that transfer data to the right system at the right time. Like a director of an orchestra.

Having spent a lot of time in enterprise which is not related to software development (or IT at all) I'm pretty familiar with a lot of the low / no code or Robot Process Automation systems. Which always end up requiring specialized developers, except, you can't hire software developers for them so you end up with various consultants creating huge messes. Microsoft's Cowork is the first time I've seen a system which can actually directly replace people who aren't experts in their business domain. It requires a lot less than any other system I've seen before. You need someone who has global, intune and AI admin in the Microsoft ecosystem, who know enough about software development to evaluate an app to be safe and efficient and how to debug it, and a domain expert. Then you'll have something which "just works". It's scary really.

I had no domain knowledge of PowerBI like at all, and while I could fill a data architect role, I would have never been able to do anything beyond a semantic model in Fabric and even on the semantic model it's not like I've ever worked with DAX. Yet Cowork (with read access to the Fabric workspace) could guide me through the process of creating a powerBI report set which was good enough that the business wanted to use it with a few minor improvements... Five months ago, this would have been a 2 people job. Now I was basically a puppet getting told which button to click in the report editor. If Cowork had write access it wouldn't have needed me in the loop once the data was delivered to the datalake it shortcutted to.

It depends. Ah, well I guess it's a litlle unfair to say that because in the context of your question I absolutely didn't mean for it to be taken literally and I should've been more clear. It does depend on domain though. For some of our engineering and control software it is almost meant literally. Since we'd have very few abstractions beyond the language primitives because of explicity.

For what you were asking though, it's not no-abstractions it's YAGNI where business logic lives in "just" functions which operate on plain data structures with runtime assertions and validation. The data structures will usually include domain specific types. There are no classes, object hierachies or architecture abstractions, at least, there almost never ever are. When it absolutely doesn't make sense not to introduce an abstraction beyond what we typically want, then it's allowed. This pains a lot of Uncle Bob's disciples, until it doesn't.

The advantage of it is that we've found that it works really well with LLM's. At least in my experience they seem to be absolutely excellent with explicit, localized code instead of layers of indirection.

The thing about Zig in these times is that it proves that software development as a craft is not dead or replaced by LLMs.

We've heavily adopted LLM's, to the point where I'll often not touch any code and have a better and more maintainable codebase than if it had been written by any of our developers (myself included). I'm not sure it would be possible if our philosophy wasn't explicity, no abstractions and defensive programming, but when every function is it's own thing with runtime assertions and ways of dealing with corrupt states as soon as they happen. Well... the LLM can do that when you can.

That being said. I think it's not new that you can write computer software without computer science, until you can't. Where I see the challenge with LLM's and software development as a business is that a lot of software developers work(ed) that can be automated because they don't actually require computer science as such. Having setup company wide "apps" for Microsoft's cowork, I think any sort of semi-expert level office job is going to be in danger. I'm not a huge fan, and I was never hyped on AI but it's ridilous what you can do in the enterprise office space (and how easy it is) when you're married with Microsoft.

In systems engineering this was proven in court when you have one engineer writing specs and another implementing the "samish" system from those specs, but I'm not sure that would relate to any of the art assets made by the original authors of a game. I'd imagine any art, narrative writing or sound would still be considered IP, and without those things you don't have much of a game.

I suspect it won't stop people, and that it won't be much of an issue in a lot of cases. I wouldn't want to be the one to test it in any sort of court though. Not even on the other side of things, where it'll become even more of a nightmare to protect your indie IP on any form of platform which doesn't heavily regulate things.

I'm not very familiar with Rust, but doesn't cargo pull a lot of external dependencies for most projects? I really like how Go can do everything with just the standard library, but I wasn't aware Rust was similar. For typescript we've moved our stuff to bun. It has it's own risk management perspective compared to node, but at least it's now possible to build web services without having to rely on a bunch of external dependencies. Which in our highly regulated business would require security policies for each dependency explaining the risks, why we accept them and how we mitigate them.

I challenge you to find a laptop that can do what my macbook air m1 with 8gb of ram does at the $899 it was through the education store. No fan, awesome battery life, good trackpad and keyboard, the ability to not get hot while using it.

I'm a senior platform engineer who at the time I bought it was a senior software developer, who can still use it for my daily tasks despite it having 8gb of ram. Until very recently the 32gb T14 I had ad work was frankly worse performant than the little air, while having a battery life of around 45 minutes a fan sounding like a jetengine and a keyboard so hot it made the sun jealous. My new model is way faster than my macbook air though, but the old model was technically newer than the air. Obviously the comparisson isn't completely fair since we run a lot of corporate enterprise stuff on our laptops, but still.

I'd really like a Linux laptop, but a Framework laptop is expensive (and it has loud fans and runs hot). A tuxedo is even more expensive and has fans where you'd place it on your legs for whatever reason, and runs hot. Looking at the laptop market now, I can't see what you'd buy. A week ago I would've said the Neo (if the 8gb of ram holds up as well on the mobile chip as it does on the m1), but today I'm guessing a refurbished air with 16gb would be the only real option for someone who want's a cool low noise machine with decent battery time.

Whether you run OS/X or Asahi, I really can't see what you'd buy other than these. At least if you actually use it on your lap and don't just have it sit in a dock on a table.

Then again, I'm the sort of person who would buy the pink neo because it would fuck with the perception people have of my mid 40 Scandinavian conservativeish dad look. So maybe it is just about the message?

I think what is crazy here is that the USA can block a Dutch company from selling their products. Don't get me wrong, this would have made sense in the world 15 years ago, but today? We all know that China plays dirty, but all those US made LLM's sure seem to know an awful lot about things in IP protected content.

Though to be fair, I think everyone knew that China was always going to have their 100% domestic chip manufacturing supply chain. I'd argue that the blocks were mainly a delaying tactic by the USA oligarchy. Simply blocking ASML from doing business with China would in itself motivate China to move faster, but I guess the decision makers and their advisors calculated that it would be slower than letting China buy the machinery and reverse engineer it.

Of course that didn't really work out. The only reason the media is picking up on these stories is that China, did, get their hands on the machinery, but then... of course they did.

Ironic is claiming that Napoleon destroyed civil society, when his reforms are in many ways the foundation for modern civil society. Rule of law, national public education, the concept of a national bank, formation of the middle class, and so on. To say that Napoleon destroyed civil soceity is just plain wrong, Napoleon founded modern civil society.

To be fair, he (the national assembly really) stole the whole "all men being equal" and all the ideas on accessible readable law thing from the Dutch after the Dutch "joined" the French Republic. It's also very likely that Napoleon would've turned out like any other despot if he had held power longer.

No kidding, I was considering one to replace my 8g air m1. Which was questionable to begin with performance wise, but it's so worn after all these years. Certainly won't do it now.

Companies like Sonatype would be an issue since they are owned by USA private equity. We would not give "Vista Equity" access to anything with the current EU US relationship. It's bad enough that we're so tied into Microsoft, which the EU might task us with leaving if they deem it critical enough for the security of the European energy sector. That's a risk we live with though, there isn't a realistic alternative.

That being said, our current strategy is more along the lines of building thind within standard libraries. We really wanted to adopt Go company wide, but it's proven impossible for non-SWE staff to use AI to create their projects in anything but Python. So instead we've created AI configurations that know our security policies, the tools we want them to use and we've setup security policies which won't even allow you to run a Python executionable inside a virtual environment unless your devices is sepcifically allowed to do so in that specific folder. Similarily we've completely limited what VSCode extensions they can use down to the named folder version. Which sort of sucks, and I doubt a lot of it would be possible if it wasn't because the c-levels are personally liable for security under EU law.

We'll see what happens after september when the summer holidays are over and the real token cost of AI will kick in.