__float

You can also buy the Fully legs/motor on their own and bring your own desktop.

I really disliked the bamboo desk fwiw and much prefer the thicker 1" laminate "wood" one. I wish I'd gotten the extended range legs, though.

It is very good practical advice.

It also saddens me greatly, imagining what computing could look like if systems evolved differently.

> desktop Linux doesn't (and won't for UX reasons)

Can you elaborate?

What do you recommend then? DNS doesn't usually change that often, but if you mess it up when it does, you're in for some pain if TTLs are high!

Did that mean success rate from multiple runs or speed for a single run?

You can set a minimum age for packages (https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/reference/supply-ch...), though that's not perfect (and becomes less effective if everyone uses it).

Sometimes code generation is a useful tool, and maybe people have read and reviewed the generator.

The difference here is that the generator is a non-deterministic LLM and you can't reason about its output the same way.

They may want proof that you, the human filling out this form, are authorized to publish apps, communications, etc. as the company you say you represent.

"uv" is a very widely used tool in the Python ecosystem, and Python is important to AI. Calling it "a random Python packaging org" seems a bit unfair.

While I don’t think the new meaning is incredibly widespread yet, it’s not uncommon for words to change meaning over time. I wouldn’t be surprised if a decade or two from now, the original meaning has been mostly forgotten.

Err, what do you mean they cannot do anything? Where are you meeting these programmers??

I mean, two of them are cloud vendors. The rest just seem like very boring components of a (somewhat) modern data pipeline.

What are the common terms for those? (I have heard "devbox" across multiple companies, and I'm not in the LLM world enough to know the other parts.)

I've worked for years at companies that only use Google Sheets.

For 99% of people (sometimes we let Finance folks have an Excel license), it's more than enough. Google Apps Script is also reasonably useful, and the newer Smart Chips are a nice addition.

It's not, because it's a conspiracy theory. They'll make tenuous connections between unrelated things and extrapolate some grand scheme to match their fiction.

Sometimes political views should actually get you shunned.

You're always free to create a fork.

That's part of my problem. I actually don't love how many billion options Anki has, and I'd love something with a more opinionated UI.

(I think the data model underneath Anki is...showing its age (and lack of explicit design) and building that on top of it would not be too easy. I've thought about it a few times.)

The (paid!) iOS client has always been a disappointment to me, and I've long been jealous of the open source Android one.

I don't mind so much that it's paid, given how much use I get for the price, but it sucks knowing it sucks and not being able to help make it better.

This is kind of a weird request, IMO.

If you're a homelab NixOS user, isn't it on you to try to answer these questions? A home lab is for learning, and if you don't want to do that, what's the point?

The second paragraph explains this: they already have paid, and some people have paid [again], but their purchase is not accepted.

Maybe this is a naive take, but I don't really think LLMs have done that much to change the actual situation around ability/outcomes. If you are actually a very good C# programmer, knowing Swift and searching some Apple documentation seems very reasonable.

It might help "unstick" you if you aren't super confident, but it doesn't seem to me like it's actually leveling up mediocre programmers to "very good" ones, in familiar or unfamiliar domains.

There's a huge amount you're missing by boiling down their complaint to "bubble sorts or inelegant code". The architecture of the new code, how it fits into the existing system, whether it makes use of existing utility code (IMO this is a huge downside; LLMs seem to love to rewrite a little helper function 100x over), etc.

These are all important when you consider the long-term viability of a change. If you're working in a greenfield project where requirements are constantly changing and you plan on throwing this away in 3 months, maybe it works out fine. But not everyone is doing that, and I'd estimate most professional SWEs are not doing that, even!

> That turned into about 10 hours of conversation with Claude to pull it all together.

Did the author write an actual parser, or does this mean they spent 10 hours coaxing Claude into writing this blog post?

There's not a lot of depth here, and this doesn't really feel like it says much.

The blog post mostly compares Postgres, MySQL, SQL Server... and then flips between comparisons to BigQuery occasionally, and Snowflake other times. Is that intentional (and is it accurate?), or did the LLM get confused?

You're counting the cost of running the model, but what about training it? You can't count the compute and data costs at $0.

Trump was never debanked. To my recollection, no protesters in the trucker convoys were either.

Some social media accounts were suspended and fundraisers were stopped.

> Yet software developed in C, with all of the foibles of its string routines, has been sold and running for years with trillions of USD is total sales.

This doesn't seem very relevant. The same can be said of countless other bad APIs: see years of bad PHP, tons of memory safety bugs in C, and things that have surely led to significant sums of money lost.

> It's also very easy to get this wrong, I almost wrote `hostname[20]=0;` first time round.

Why would you do this separately every single time, then?

The problem with bad APIs is that even the best programmers will occasionally make a mistake, and you should use interfaces (or...languages!) that prevent it from happening in the first place.

The fact we've gotten as far as we have with C does not mean this is a defensible API.

You might find https://blog.jez.io/history-of-sorbet-syntax/ interesting, written by one of the primary contributors to Sorbet.

Sorbet is a bit different from TypeScript because it has runtime type checking, not just static.

If I remember correctly, the namespaces feature (now released as Ruby::Box) had some pretty severe performance penalties (possibly even for code that doesn't use it?).

Does anyone know if that's been improved?

I work in a large Sorbet codebase (though it isn't a Rails one) and it's a huge boon IMO. The number of tests we don't need to write because of Sorbet is really nice.

It does occasionally require structuring your code differently, but I find the type-system-encouraged approach often gives a more elegant and harder-to-misuse interface in the end.

I think so: it looks like "UniFi Teleport" is also based on Wireguard.

You can also do this with a travel router like one of GL.iNet's and Tailscale subnet routers.