andychiare

Authorization has always been the primary question; authentication is simply an ancillary question to help answer it.

We are in the context of "who verifies the verifier?" :-)

Thanks!

Just to clarify, it's not about a new standard, folks. It's about giving things names to avoid confusion and mixing up different things.

The "rule cluster" recalls symbolic AI, the old-good fashioned AI of the past century. While that approach wasn't as successful as the new GenAI, combining the two could be beneficial

JWTs were never designed for session management. Their primary purpose is to transfer information whose origin can be verified. Period.

The idea that they are related to sessions is, unfortunately, a very common misconception. I wrote an article about this some time ago: https://dev.to/andychiare/sessions-tokens-and-rocknroll-4pdc

It's been a general trend for a couple of years now for any website. AI uses content to provide answers to users. This doesn't mean your content is no longer valuable. It just means that you no longer receive direct feedback on how good your content is.

Great read! Queueing theory is fascinating. In a sense, it's an attempt to control uncertainty, but it's not always easy. For example, choosing the right queue is still a hard problem :-) Watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPxBKxU8GIQ

It's not just gestures that are adapted; words are too. In the parts of Italy where I was born and raised, for example, adults used to adapt words to make them easier for children to pronounce. However, this practice has recently been discouraged by paediatricians because it can apparently hinder children’s later acquisition of standard language.

Boolean logic/black-and-white thinking is convenient for simple processing. But the world isn't simple.

If you just consider time, there are statements whose truth you can't determine: "It will rain tomorrow" (BTW, tomorrow "tomorrow" will be the day after tomorrow)

> “AI everywhere” is not the goal. Useful software is the goal.

Great observation! Often the excitement of novelty makes us lose sight of the real goal

I love Borges and his lucid hallucinations. As this story highlights, when a representation of reality (the map) ends up mapping reality one by one, the representation becomes useless. I see this as a warning for the progress of AI. When AI maps human intelligence one by one, it will be useless (or perhaps we will be the ones who will be useless).

> It is not possible to accurately estimate software work.

An "accurate estimation" is an oxymoron. By definition, an estimate is imprecise. It only serves to provide an idea of the order of magnitude of something: will this work take hours? days? weeks? months? You can't be more accurate. And this does not apply only to software development.