The order is the main thing, but it's not just that. It's common to swap cat with something else like head, tail, grep etc., and that's easy. If you have "< file command" instead of "cat file | command" you have to make edits in two places to insert the "|".
For interactive use like these examples I think this is terrible advice. cat is very helpful because it fits into pipelines like every other command. For example:
Take a look at the start of a file:
head file
Filter for things:
head file | grep ...
Reformat, remove unwanted stuff, etc.:
head file | grep ... | sed ...
Do things or dry run echo based on each line:
head file | grep ... | sed ... | while read a; do ...; done
It all looks good so we change head to cat to run it on the whole file:
cat file | grep ... | sed ... | while read a; do... ; done
Yes you can technically change "head file |" to "< file" but why bother? That's changes in two places and navigating between them instead of just <alt-d> cat.
Same is true for other workflows. E.g. if you start with one of these supposedly better commands like "wc -l < file" (why isn't that just "wc -l file"?):
wc -l < file
Oh wait, we don't want every line, just ones matching a pattern. We could change it to
wc -l <(grep ... file)
or
grep -c ... file
which are both more work than just adding to an existing cat-based pipeline, where we just replace cat with "grep ...":
grep ... file | wc -l
If we need to also match another pattern or whatever this pipeline approach is better then too.
It would be trivial to train future models to detect and read it though (and some already can, based on other comments in this thread). It only works as much as it does because it's new and reading it hasn't been a goal.
Definitely not just grading. Tutoring is explaining and back and forth discussion to impart knowledge, in context and in response to specific difficulties/confusion the student is having.
Most initial work for them would be in familiar, well-controlled environments - replacing humans in existing factories. I think whether they'd be cost effective for that will remain unknown even after a few years in service though.
That doesn't contradict anything I said. Private networks can be huge, e.g. in big companies, and they can still use .internal. .internal serves quite a different purpose to that proposed for .self, so the top level comment I replied to doesn't make much sense.
Site errored out and gave me three different error messages as I reloaded. I guess it's self-hosted on something underpowered, and dynamic where static would do the job?
Everyone knows Oxford, but the are many thousands of universities, most of which are not known to most employers. I am not an employer, but I work in higher education and see transcripts of transferring and exchange students, and many (probably most) come with some kind of guide on how to interpret the grades, because there are a huge variety of ways of assigning them and defining them (e.g. at some universities a D is a fail, and at some a D is a pass - to know which you're looking at, you need a guide!).
I think you misunderstood. The 1963 term is "hacker", and its 1963 meaning is "computer intruder". I.e. the journalists are using the earlier definition and the definition referred to by "Hacker News" came later.