HN user

jpnc

136 karma
Posts0
Comments46
View on HN
No posts found.

It's always funny seeing people that write like this as if they are somehow exempt from the future we're seemingly rushing into. Bro, you prooompting yourself into unconsciousness is not going to make you not obsolete. Unless you're being sarcastic in which case poe's law.

Mojo 1.0 Beta 3 months ago

It's been really interesting to see all the desperation on hero pages for all these products and services ever since AI came into prominence. I think the funniest for me was opening IBM DB2 product page and seeing it labeled as 'AI database'. Hysterical.

why, or, what is meant by More errors caught at compile time means an agent can quickly check their work statically without unit and other tests.

There is principle of the matter and then there are exceptions. We say that women can give birth. That holds true in principle even if there are those who can't due to biological failings.

Also when doing joins its cleaner to use the table_name.id or alias.id then table_name.table_name_id or alias.table_name_id or whatever else besides id is used However, using 'table_name.table_name_id' and then having another table with an FK that references it with the same name i.e. 'table_2.table_name_id' allows you to use a shorthand 'USING' clause instead of 'ON' in databases that support it.

One thing I'm missing when modeling FSM like this is different states having different set of constraints, even if only being concerned with nullity. It's a shame having to make the field optional just because you do not have the appropriate value in the initial state of the entity.

The title could probably be extended to 'You'll regret using natural keys as primary keys' and it would be right in some ways. Personally, I've come to the conclusion that it's probably best to use both surrogate and natural keys. Surrogates (IDENTITYs, UUIDs what-have-you) as PK from a technical perspective and natural key as 'PK' from a business/data modeling perspective.

Somewhere along the way the wires in my brain have crossed and started associating the word 'content' with 'litter'. So a 'content creator' became 'litterer'. It made it make sense to me why the internet feels more and more awful. It's like a park being more and more covered with litter.

I wonder what the point of that sentence is - to get picked up by HN? Kinda like how any product or service even tangentially related to data suddenly has 'by the way also AI and stuff' added somewhere on their landing page. You don't see 'Developed using intellisense' used in READMEs.

JSS is not currently used to make determinations about artistry, and it still isn’t considered ready to use on certain complex routine components, like beam connections and dance elements on floor; the tech just isn’t there yet

So at what point does a sensor of some kind that does some computation become 'AI'? Is this just marketing buzzword bandwagoning?

We clearly can, but not with gusto. LLM can't feel gusto about anything. If the point is that it doesn't matter as long as a person reading it is convinced there is gusto, then my point is that the 'opinion' of such a thing is irrelevant.