abujazar

> SIP is secure boot for macOS.

Not really. «Secure Boot» is intended to secure the boot process through signature verification. However the security model is completely broken, https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/03/unkil...

SIP is a protection layer which protects system files from modification also after the system is booted.

This is good design. I love when developers are primarily designers.

I recently replaced my 4770K/3080 Ti rig with a 13600K and can wholeheartedly recommend the upgrade. Such an old CPU is not only keeping the GPU back, but load times etc are also like 10-50 times faster.

Good point

How do you end up with two identical SQL tables in the first place?

Noodle is a task management app for students, not an LMS : )

This is peak bullshit level.

Yea, that’s true as of today in the US. There’s no way you could get such a deal where I live (Norway) due to our weak currency, and it used to be the other way around just a few years ago

You’re right and my knowledge was outdated about the prices.

For $3000 you can get a top end GPU, not a whole gaming PC. Most gamers have mid-range GPUs like those in the M2 Max.

This is kinda funny. I worked on 400 MB+ files in Photoshop on a Mac with 128 MB memory in 1999.

But the pixels are visible, and text on those displays is so much less legible than on a 200+ ppi display. I simply don’t get how some developers find those monitors to be acceptable and at the same time disregard the Apple headset. Perhaps it’s just lack of vision.

The first question that pops into my head is why you’d work on a curved monitor (of which there still doesn’t exist a high resolution model) as a software engineer. Do you find the workspace on a single curved display sufficient?

My primary concern with the Apple headset is the relatively low resolution of 23M pixels. Our eyes can perceive so much more detail, and I’m afraid the low resolution will reintroduce pixellation as is commonly seen on low end and curved displays.

Same on Safari for iPhone… The page is completely illegible.

tl;dr; HTTP3 provides a little improvement, but optimizing search speed is much more important in this case.

At first glance this looks like official information, but in fact it's a campaign site from https://futureoflife.org and should be clearly marked as such.

BBEdit is still my go-to editor for plain text files, one-off regex text processing tasks and for ssh-ing into hosts to fix config files.

In my experience Laravel teams are WAY more productive than Quarkus teams though.

The 5.8 docs are like from like 7 or 8 years ago. I’d say the 10.x docs have improved a lot, but I do share some of your opinions on the docs in general. Anyone can contribute to them, though. https://laravel.com/docs/10.x/contracts

The original Mac was also snappier.

I love how LLMs have got the attention of proper programmers such that the Python mess is getting cleaned up.

The facts could be more clearly stated by defraining from stating open-source software as the cause.

Just like any author of MIT licensed open source software is clear about their license which clearly states they are not responsible in any way whatsoever for the shortcomings of their licensees.

Spot on

«Open source» was in the opening line of the statement as if it was something to blame.

I think it's fair to mention the bug originated in redis-py, but I don't find it relevant at all to mention «open-source» in the opening line of the public statement about the outage. Or «outside library» for that matter. It was ChatGPT release QA that failed, and then they failed to admit it.

Yes, and this is still the sole responsibility of OpenAI. They chose to include redis-py without warranties and are responsible for their own QA on any product built on it.

They're not blaming, legally speaking. But they're communicating that open source software caused their outage. OpenAI chose to use software that explicitly came without warranties, and are legally solely responsible for problems caused by open-source libraries they choose to include in their product.

I agree it's a good example – if not great. But considering OpenAI itself is as closed source as can be, mentioning open-source software as the cause of their outage in the very first line of their statement seems somewhat out of place. I don't think it's a coincidence that the open-source comes in the opening line while the acknowledgement to the Redis team is at the very end. Many outside of software engineering might read this as «open source caused OpenAI to crash».

The disclosure is provides valuable information, but the introduction suggests someone else or «open-source» is to blame:

>We took ChatGPT offline earlier this week due to a bug in an open-source library which allowed some users to see titles from another active user’s chat history.

Blaming an open-source library for a fault in closed-source product is simply unfair. The MIT licensed dependency explicitly comes without any warranties. After all, the bug went unnoticed until ChatGPT put it under pressure, and it was ChatGPT that failed to rule out the bug in their release QA.