rodrigosetti

It's a moltbook agent tasked to get HN attention

I don’t understand the point. We are all free to disobey and have to deal with the consequences. It can’t be otherwise. Nobody can pass as an automaton.

They should've used crypto

This is a qualitatively different kind of abstraction. All other abstractions still require the programmer to express the solution in a formal language, while LLMs are allowing the user to express the solution in natural language. It's no longer programming, but much more like talking to a programmer as a manager.

We’re getting more specialized as a society, and we have to accept the facts that not everyone knows everything anymore

Buddhism claims that our feeling of separation (and thus the multiplicity of subjective experiences) is an illusion. But I never really understood why.

My hunch is that this is related to the question of why we are experiencing this particular moment in time and not another one in the past or in the future, is related. If you believe in the many words interpretation of quantum mechanics, one can also say why I’m experiencing this particular branch.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/rodrigosetti

No knowledge can be fully explained in words

We should trust engineers when they deem their own minor pull requests as not requiring review.

i.e. trust engineerings ability to judge their PR as trivial.

This requires trusting good intent (which I think is healthy), and trusting their self awareness.

Intelligence is a resource of this type

I feel this resonates with mindfulness lifestyle: give your full attention to the present moment and the quality of your activity (and product) will show.

If you don’t mind me asking, how big was your development team?

I’m reclining my seat

I’d rather work on a codebase where strict standards were applied.

Banning “goto” is one of such, but also allowing to be utilized under certain conditions to write state machines for example.

I think we will miss innovations if we are dogmatic about features.

“Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.” - Pablo Picasso

Very much agreeing with Nietzsche on suffering being a great source of value, even desirable, for personal growth.

I don’t think any technique is inherently bad: imperative, global variables, and even “goto” can be used wisely to solve problems.

Functional programming (similarly type systems) is another great technique to use when you have constraints that you’d like to be automatically enforced by the compiler (referential transparency, equational reasoning, etc.)

When I have to use a language that doesn’t allow expressing problems functionally when that would be the ideal expression of it, I feel I’m using the wrong tool for the job.

This is awesome. How would one describe this formal system? There are no cells essentially

This article makes me anxious because, when disagreeing, I never really considered the power difference before.

Agree. Programming is a wonderful intellectual activity; there is so much beauty in the logical structure of algorithms. It's far from boring.

TDD doesn’t work for the really interesting problems: you can’t achieve a deep creative solution through small mechanical improvements

This is a bitter passive-aggressive eye-bleeding website

What career is a meritocracy?

People are interesting regardless of how many books they read.

My two cents: being happy most of the time in your career is an impossible goal.

Everyone struggles. Sometimes they are miserable, bored, frustrated, burned out, overwhelmed, confused, tired, etc. no matter what career you choose, how lucky or skilled you are.

This is not to say that attempts to improve are futile, but it’s better to dispel the illusion that career heaven exists, so we have a sober and liberating experience when dealing with its challenges.

I think usually the sender is implicit (the calling context) so it could me omitted.

Racket [1] has a non conventional syntax too.

[1] https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/ivaraccess.html#%28fo...

Executives are more politically savvy and know that in-person connections are more effective to build alliances, coalitions, trust, etc.

Additionally, they have the resources to pay people to take care of their kids and do their home chores, so that they don’t need the flexibility much

Because technology is basically business automation. Much less of coding is hobby or science.

So Wolfram has initiated two of the four scientific paradigms

Yup. Netflix doesn’t sell tech, it sells subscriptions to scripted drama. It uses tech to expedite its business, like everyone else.

Yes, they invent a little more technology than your typical small business spreadsheet. But tech is a commodity for them because the only strategy for tech is that “it has to be good”.

You don't need a nervous system for information processing