glhaynes

But as you hint at in your second paragraph, people do take them instead of real medicine. So in that sense, it can be harmful.

As a kid who hadn't seen anything else, the mechanic of "save early, save often" made perfect sense to me (and I've always wished I had a similar mechanism IRL!), just as I imagine it did to the Sierra authors. And in fact I think there's a lot to like about it -- it's not "good game design", but imo it does provide stakes and a sense of danger in a way that the Lucasarts/etc stuff doesn't. But, yeah, a kid who's had more than passing experience with modern games certainly might not see it that way!

But I don't want farmers, I want meat

"All that time babysitting the AIs just to be a little faster" doesn't seem like an accurate/unbiased portrayal of what they said: "The v1 feature feels more like a v3 given the amount of iteration it already went through."

Sometimes I think the main value in AI-maintained code being “high quality” is when the structure can enforce invariants. If invalid states aren’t representable, then the AI can’t easily add bugs in the future.

Of course that just leads to: what’s the best way to achieve that goal? Through elegant code or adding lots of tests? Which is a debate from long before LLMs existed.

What an amazingly goofy (but also kinda maybe makes sense?) feature!

rolleyes

Why? This doesn't follow at all.

I look at such things similarly, and have never felt like "team building exercises" were particularly valuable. I'm working with these people on the products we build for hours every day; I don't need to do an escape room with them to "team build".

That said, I have to recognize that this may be partially because of my personality. I don't "do great" at mixers like this. I'd rather go home and be with my family than drink beer—regardless of label—in a corporate setting. People describe me as charismatic and engaging one-on-one, but I'm awkward and unhappy at a big crowd event.

But there are other people whom I think get a lot of value and connections out of them! So it's kinda hard for me to say.

Downgrades in quality, though, stick out like a sore thumb. "I didn't really like going to these things before, but at least they had good beer." It can also be a real "it's the thought that counts" sort of thing. When you show me that you're willing to spend less on me, it sends a signal, sometimes stronger than if you'd never spent anything on me in the first place.

As an American: we're gonna have to touch the stove to learn. Wish so badly that it weren't so.

Can't be doing rEaL woRk unless you're flipping front panel switches to input machine code instructions.

Seems like there's a good argument to be made that we'll have plenty of opportunities for valuable growth and learning, just about different things. Just like it's always been with technology. The machine does some of the stuff I used to do so now I do some different stuff.

This seems the most likely explanation to me.

It's just much more visually interesting than a page full of perfect burgers. Each one looks like a unique thing from the real world; they don't "look AI", as the kids say these days.

Yeah, good point. For a little hobbyist site of no importance, I'm not too worried about vendor lock-in, but that calculus changes as it gets more important.

Can anyone say why this is being downvoted? Seems like it makes sense to me, but this isn't my area of expertise.

I never saw that bug, I don't think, but there was one where it had to start the response before you switched away. That's thankfully been fixed for a few weeks.

Bummer of an experience. About a month ago I bought an unlocked 8a from a seller on Swappa and had no issue getting GrapheneOS (which works well!) on it.

It'd be interesting to prompt it to do the same job but try to be innovative.

To your point, yeah, I mostly don't want AI to be innovative unless I'm asking for it to be. In fact, I spend much more time asking it "is that a conventional/idiomatic choice?" (usually when I'm working on a platform I'm not super experienced with) than I do saying "hey, be more innovative."

Yes. I'll go down a wrong path in 20 minutes that'd have taken me half a day to go down by hand, and I keep having to remind myself that code is cheap now (and the robot doesn't get tired) so it's best to throw it away and spend 10 more minutes and get it right.

There is truly no space in my device repertoire for a Neo and I can say that with confidence because of how much time I've spent trying to find one.

Apple's fault that they didn't bother to edit the text that says "No install fuss"?

No install fuss — download and start designing immediately.

also

Gatekeeper blocks the app immediately. You'll see either "TUIStudio cannot be opened because it is from an unidentified developer" or "TUIStudio is damaged and can't be opened" on newer macOS after quarantine flags the binary. To get past it: right-click the .app → Open → Open anyway — or go to System Settings → Privacy & Security → "Open Anyway".

If you're addressing this to me: you need to separate my description of how I perceive things from any effort/desire on my part to make that come to pass. I don't expect to stand to gain if AI continues to get better at coding — most likely just the opposite; this is the first time in my career that I've ever felt much anxiety about whether I'd be able to find work in my field in the future.

There are many others like me who share this expectation, and, while we certainly may be wrong, it's not because of some sinister plan to make the prophecy come true. (There are certainly some who do have sinister/profit-seeking motives, of course!)

It'd be interesting (earnestly!) to see someone make a solid case for AI reimplementation being bad but that the original (afaik) "clean room" project, Compaq's reimplementation of IBM's PC BIOS (something most people seem to see as a righteous move toward openness and freedom), was good.

An argument that I have some sympathy for, while still being moderately+ in favor of gun control (here in the USA where I'm a citizen).

It seems that gun control—though imperfect—in regions that have implemented it has had a good bit of success and the legitimate/non-harmful capabilities lost seem worth it to me in trade for the gains. (Reasonable people can disagree here!)

Whereas it seems to me that if we accept the proposition that the vast majority of code in the future is going to be written by AI (and I do), these valuable projects that are taking hard-line stances against it are going to find themselves either having to retreat from that position or facing insurmountable difficulties in staying relevant while holding to their stance.

You can also just not choose to enroll any fingerprints in Touch ID. It’s totally optional even if you have the hardware.

The "Swift has too many keywords now" meme makes me want to go insane. The vast majority of Swift code never runs into any of that stuff; so, what advocates of it are saying is in effect "we don't want Swift to expand into these new areas (that it has potential to be really good at) even if it's in a way that doesn't affect current uses at all."

That said, the Swift 6 / Strict Concurrency transitions truly have been rough and confusing. It's not super clear to me that much of it could have been avoided (maybe if the value of Approachable Concurrency mode had been understood to be important from the beginning?), and the benefits are real, but my gut feeling is that a lot of the "Swift is too complicated" stuff is probably just misplaced annoyance at this.

If you want a picture of the future of SWE, imagine a tiny paw mashing on a keyboard — for ever

So ask the AI to just translate one little chunk at a time, right?

This is so well-written with obvious care! Answers so much of what I've been wanting to know, as someone who's thinking about taking this plunge.