It’s not a helpful comparison because it’s too early. If the first iPhone went away, no one would care. Once software is rearchitected around AI, it will look a lot different. Your phone won’t need UIs that are as complex, because we can just tell AI what to change or open or do.
The submitter could decide and curate what is useful to be shared, whether that’s exact message logs, or the subagents and skills they think made the difference.
It’s not cargo culting, it does make a difference and there are papers on arxiv discussing it. The trouble is that it’s hard to tell whether it’ll help or hurt - telling it to act as an expert in one field may improve your result, or may make it lose some of the other perspectives it has which might be more important for solving the problem.
Because to a 20 year old who is worried about getting a job, the value of getting all A’s and learning less is higher than getting all B’s and learning more.
> When asked by The Hill if Gallup had received any feedback from the White House or anyone in the current administration before making the decision, the spokesperson said, “this is a strategic shift solely based on Gallup’s research goals and priorities.”
Why bury the lede? Why not just say “it’s got nothing to do with Trump, we’re doing this because X isn’t a priority for Gallup anymore.”
Are you just mapping a text file of status codes to a single template? None of them are any different? Why make all of them instead of just showing the 404 page?
What do they do when they turn 15, realize they, say, have no sex drive, but have been on anti depressants for years and cannot take a break from life in order to now learn the emotional regulation skills they should have developed from 7-15? Antidepressants often mask issues which later manifest in unexpected ways, even if you don’t notice any immediate side effects.
I’ve also found Dr Amen’s “types” of ADHD the most helpful way of understanding how ADHD affects people differently.
When I had my brain scanned, it was explained to me that ADHD isn’t a matter of lack of willpower or distraction - when you intentionally try to concentrate or focus (rather than when focus just “appears” naturally like it does for some tasks you’re interested in), blood actually flows away from your prefrontal cortex so you really do become worse at regulating decision making and have worse performance at whatever task you’re trying to accomplish. Whereas for people who don’t have this problem, intentionally concentrating forces blood into the prefrontal cortex, improving your performance.
It was also explained that even though we usually think of ADHD as a “hardware” issue with our brains, that’s rare. It’s normally a conditioned response related to how we learned to process stress and anxiety. The idea is that if you can improve your ability to handle your underlying stress and anxiety (through trauma therapy, healthier lifestyle and habits), your mind becomes much better at handling choice and focus. Although I haven’t been able to therapy my way out of it yet.
Great point, one that I think gets missed when you write code for a living and are comfortable with the ecosystem. But I remember when I was getting started making projects - even figuring out what I needed to google to get unblocked could feel impossible. I think AI will help bring a lot of people who are “on the border” between building something with code or giving up on the idea the boost over that line.
Your anger about his comment suggests that it actually is about pride and identity. I simply don’t buy that most people here argue against AI because they’re worried about software quality and lowering the user experience. It’s the same argument the American Medical Association made in order to allow them to gatekeep physician jobs and limit openings. We’ve had developers working on adtech directly intended to reduce the quality of the user experience for decades now.
No one said artificial neurons are “less powerful.” They just work differently, and the way we “train” them is much less efficient and extensible. So of course there’s value in trying to understand how our language mechanisms work.
It’s interesting seeing splay trees mentioned in a post about “challenging algorithms and data structures.” They were taught in our undergrad algorithms class by one of the inventors (Sleator) along with a rant about how frustrated he was with other self-balancing tree algorithms and how relatively difficult they are to implement and often less performant than his splay trees.
You might not have seen this pattern before, but annotating values with units as types is a legitimate approach. There’s a whole chapter about it in the book Software Design for Flexibility by Gerald Sussmann, the author of Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, which is linked on here pretty often. It has to be done in the right way, though, in a language that’s expressive enough to support it.
I think this is a little disingenuous. It’s not that the type system makes highly abstract/generic code difficult, it’s more that the specific ways people are used to writing that type of code in dynamically typed languages doesn’t lend itself well to adding type annotations. But I think you’d be hard pressed to find many places where Haskell programmers, for example, haven’t found a different way to express whatever the Python code is achieving while also allowing for type annotations.
If UX is the sum totality of the experience of all users of the system, it can be significantly better for most users but worse for a small number. I’ve never used the app so I have no idea, I’m just saying UX is more than accessibility, so you can have a great UX for most people while being useless for others.
Keeping an existing customer is significantly less expensive than acquiring new customers. It has more to do with expected churn rate for customers and the cost to improve service not making up for the expected reduction in churn.
I’m not sure what exactly has changed - I feel like software development has been mostly stagnant since the 80s. Most everything web-dev wise is just rehashed ideas from 30-40 years ago, so I doubt they have too much to catch up on.