zelphirkalt

Talk about technologies you want to introduce can go more than one way. It can make you sound informed or it can make you sound like someone, who is performing CV-driven development. I know the type. Like for example needlessly wanting to push GraphQL into things that are simple REST APIs.

I would be fine with abandoning copyright ... If it is done for everyone equally, and not just tech giants and VC money businesses get a free pass, while everyone else still has to follow the copyright laws. Lets go ahead and usher in an age of free information and experiencing all forms of human expression for everyone. But lets also come up with a way, to compensate our creative minds and our educators and artists. How about that UBI? We stand much to gain as humanity.

Who would have thought, that this is the way, which we take to arrive at the burning books stage again? They neatly line up with historical perpetrators in that regard.

How many times the Earth's materials would we consume doing that? And wouldn't it block ma lazor from reaching the previous probes and accelerating them?

Maybe they are former AWS employees for a reason and now want things to go better than they were at AWS.

If only we listened more to people who studied CS on the job. Many disasters could prevented entirely.

Going with the doctor analogy: One type tries to be genuinely helpful, the other type suggests unnecessary operations, since it costs more.

Sounds very reasonable. It is similar to what I do. I have a chat completely separate from my editor, where I only paste necessary pieces of code, that should be considered, add some constraints or ideas to discuss and once I am satisfied, I copy back code into my editor, where I might rename things and might further improve things. Other times, I just code it myself, when it is already clear to me or seems enjoyable. I think for me it is important to engage in doing things oneself, here and there, and make the architectural decisions, to actually feel a connection to a project and develop an in-depth understanding.

When it is a human scam caller, what I sometimes do is to say "Hello" and then, when they start talking, and I can already guess they are full of shit, I act as if I am not hearing them properly and say "Hello?? Heeellooo? Hello?" Then they hang up lol.

Only, if they manage to improve it, so that regular photos and voice messages can be sent. I am mostly fine with texting only, but such things are an instant no-go for most people.

How to hit you up?

Medical assistance can be received outside of the train, or once medical professionals are on board, while the train moves to the next station at the very least, if it isn't there already.

That reminds me of a story by a former coworker of mine, who had a xing account and repeatedly asked them to not send me him ads and spam e-mails. They ultimately closed his account.

Some companies are so dead set on doing this shit, that they don't even have mechanism in place that would enable them to act upon you opting out. It is a sign of dysfunctional companies. You can also observe this, when you send companies a GDPR request for deletion and they do eeeeverything to not have to go into their shitty system and delete the data, because that would require them to do manual work.

Would be interesting to see, whether they are so innocent or actually have been cutting corners when it comes to their pord system and software.

Wasn't that by Abelson/Sussman in SICP lectures, instead of Dijkstra? Or did Abelson/Sussman say that because Dijkstra said it, quoting Dijkstra?

Yep, but then what takes 1h? They must have had that multiple times already. Either get them off the tracks in whatever state they are in, or get them out of the train. I don't find it to be a good reason to punish the collective amount of all train passengers in any train in the vicinity by making everyone an hour late. It seems very unprofessional.

Meanwhile I am sitting in an InterCity"Express" train in Germany, which already started 14 minutes late, and somehow managed to drive so slowly, that at every stop another ~2 minutes were lost. Now just standing around at a stop, because of some medical emergency at the next station, and announced a delay of fucking 90 minutes. How long can it take to remove whoever causes the medical emergency from the tracks or wherever they are and continue driving? It is all so nuts here, all so idiotic. The last 10 times or so, that I have been traveling, every fucking time they have stupid issues.

And they don't even manage to have functioning displays inside the trains. Every now and then the displays are turned off. Why am I not allowed to see the up-to-date status?

Exactly. I couldn't have said it better. I hope I will still live to see the pitchforks coming out and taking all of this crap down, but I fear it might be longer than a lifetime, before we rid ourselves of these parasites.

Lazy or incapable people will do almost anything once it is normalized behavior, which vibe coding has become, to avoid having to do actual work. Even if there were cryptominers running, eating up 80% of their cores and stealing electricity, they would still let it happen. It's not their money or hardware being spent.

One of the things businesses tend to not understand is, that if you take the fun out of the activity, you also lose the passion of the people performing the activity, no matter how many times actors at the job fake passion in front of higher ups. If you lose the passion, what you will be left with it mediocre development and shoddy software.

Maybe that's "enough" for the business to survive. But it surely won't be the reason it succeeds. It can still succeed for other factors though, but the business has given up on one path to success, which is making better software than the competition.

In a way it is cheating, as it is all built on countless copyright infringements and non-consensual use of other people's works.

Only that businesses have decided it is OK as long as they are benefitting to steal from everyone else, and basically force us to be the acting hand in all of it, or threaten us with starvation (no job, no income).

Already loathing the idea of not even being able to directly blame humans and their incapability for making shitty websites, that require JS for everything, including typing a text in an input field. If we get there and the LLMs build the same crap, dialed up to 110, because even more suits want first and foremost fancy looks, rather than function, and because that's the majority of training data corpus they learned from ... I might have an existential crisis coming in. The web already sucks hard enough. At least let me blame incapable human beings for this situation.

How do you improve, if you don't write code? How do you aim to close that gap, that is the 10 different ways of improving your code? And if you don't aim to improve, how do you deem yourself capable of even reviewing AI code in say 3 to 5 years, when your code writing skill has fully atrophied?

In my experience AI often overlooks generalizations of ideas iteratively arrived at. I need to give it the idea, that something could be generalized and nudge it, to arrive at the solution.

I imagine at competitive coding the goal is quite clear, but in a real world project, the goal is not always so clear, and especially in hobby projects the ideas and goals are not that clear. I get inspiration on how to improve my project or its usability, not the LLM. I instruct it to do something a specific way, because it doesn't do anything on its own, and I need to tell it what to generalize, which it failed to see, because it didn't consider a simplification which is technically less precise, but due to user context and human nature doesn't matter (in this case it was interpreting "now" to mean the current second, which is a small time range, instead of a mere point in time).

So it still takes a ton of hand holding in a more open project. I imagine, one could also code it up in the same amount of time. But it is good for generating tons of test cases. Though one will have to review those, and impose a test style on them, give examples and so on.

This happens when the architect is out of touch. If the architect themselves works on the code, writes code, deals with the imposed restrictions, then the chances of that happening is much lower. Assuming, that they are a good architect.

At business schools they should introduce Hilbert's infinite money burning bonfire. How can an infinite cash supply still be burned, when an infinite amount of money is already burning?

Well, the problem is, they are not held accountable, but heaven forbid you as a simple citizen engage in that much IP infringement, holy moly are they gonna be at your doorstep quickly.

It's rules for thee but not for me. On an enormous scale. If it was fair, then we would have a global announcement, that the US are abandonning IP laws and copyright, and no one needs to worry about infringing on any such a thing any longer.

You probably have built very solid concepts/ideas about what types are in the program and how to name things, so that they make sense, and all other things that lead to a program being useful and easy to read, over the course of those 15 years. The situation might not be the same for more junior devs.

But also Elixir's paradigm is not the same as lets say some PHP slinging or JS. It encourages a stricter functional style, that already makes for better code than what many people produce in languages like JS and PHP, or Python.

Can you name some example and explain what happens, that the user is left without indication of failures? I am asking, because I have not had such issues yet, but maybe I just don't know I had them?

Although I also install such tools (linter, import sorter, type checker) locally in my virtualenvs in Python projects. It is possible to do so, but maybe not as straight forward. I have to give the JS ecosystem that much: With the project-local approach, they have done one thing right.