computerdork

Just wrote a comment how I've always liked Maven. It's perfect for small and medium sized projects, and for service-oriented architectures/microservices - it seems like it was designed for this! It's main goal is to help you figure out the libraries that you're using and build them in a standard way.

It isn't great for really strange and odd builds, but in that case, you should probably be breaking your project down into smaller components (each with it's own maven file) anyways.

Actually, I like Maven. It's perfect for code that is broken into medium-sized projects, which makes it great for service-oriented architectures (would have said microservices here instead, but think we're learning that breaking our services too finely down is generally not a good idea).

Yeah, it seems like Maven is designed to build just one project with relatively little build-code (although, figuring out versioning of the libs used in your build can get tricky, but guessing this is how it is in most languages). It's still one of my favorites build tools for many situations.

Have always really liked Java, but yeah, Spring overall has been terrible for the language. Autowiring is against the principles of a typesafe programming language - Don't make me guess what what object is going to be attached to a reference. And if you do, at least figure out what linked object is at compile time, not at run time.

Spring autowiring makes Java seem as a whole unnecessarily complex. Think it should be highly discouraged in the language (unless it is revamped and made apart of the compiler).

... not sure how this applies to the ObjectMapper, as I haven't programmed in Java in awhile. ... and my gripe doesn't apply to SpringBoot though:)

Hmm, actually heard it from a podcast that this is actually working with the 3d assets, and even that statement you quoted says "anchored to source 3D content." Although, that could mean a lot of things and it's still early on, so it could still just be a pass at the end by an AI model. Yeah, I'll stay on the fence until more details are released - and should mention, am no graphics expert, and am only giving my opinion as a fan of good graphics on what the results look like:)

Hmm, I do see the shadows being removed in the links you have, and have noticed that the backgrounds do look like their lighted differently from the original, but was wondering if that is just because the AI lights things differently? - they did say that these AI effects are done with the actual 3d assets themselves and is not just some type of filter that run over the existing images, so could see how the lighting could change quite a bit.

Yeah, may be the fact that they are lighted differently from the original is turning people off. Understandable. For me, still find it impressive, and think the level detail in the faces and clothing is a full step up in capability.

Took another look. You're entitled to your opinion, but, yeah, am not seeing the two light source problem you mentioned, not at least in screenshots I looked at. And for me at least, they look more realistic than with dlss 5 turned off. But may be I'm not seeing something you're seeing.

Am not 100% what's going on and why everyone is ragging on it, but to me, DLSS 5 clearly improves the graphics most of the time. Yeah, almost all the faces look more real, with more realistic skin and shadows instead looking like those CGI faces with poor detail from 12 years ago.

Personally, think it's just people freaked out that it's being improved on by AI, and therefore apart of the "AI slop" trend. Think if they had done this all with no AI and just polygons, it'd be hailed as a large step forward in graphics.

... and btw, am just as freaked out about AI taking over the creative fields as a lot of others (am a musician myself), but have to try to objective, and in my opinion, DLSS 5 is impressive.

You have a point - cheap drones have changed warfare - but you might be simplifying the issue. As some warfare experts online have discussed, it isn't that cheap drones are the only weapon that is used in Ukraine (or warfare in general), it is one option in vast array of options based on the situation (although, agreed, it is taking on a much bigger significance). Look at the war in Iran. They did a pretty standard playbook and use stealth jets and cruise missiles to surgically take out air defenses in order to gain air dominance. This would be very difficult with just cheap drones.

... but, do agree that cheap weapons are still becoming extremely important. Iran is terrorizing the middle east and strait of hormuz with cheap drones, so they are definitely important. Yeah, in the war of attrition, low cost, high-volume options are clearly very important.

Hmm, saying tests are just a hint seems to be under appreciating their significance. Yes, they do have bugs of their own, but as you said they are a measurement. Having them statistically reduces the chances of bugs reaching production. They don't remove them completely of course, but they do greatly decrease the rate of bugs (and have read the same thing, formal verification of the code is typically not worth the time and cost).

And just looked up TDD on wikipedia. Actually, the standard process is not to write all the tests first, then do the implementation. It's to do what a lot of devs already do, write some tests based on your requirements. Then, write the implementation for these tests. Then repeat, adding in more test for other paths through the system.

Didn't know this myself about TDD (I thought it was focus writing all the tests, then do the implementation). Yeah, TDD is actually a very practical approach and something I pretty much do in my own development. Instead of using a driver program to run your working code, just write unit tests to run it. And keep building your unit tests for every new feature or execution path you're working on. You'll miss a lot of them early on, but you fill out the rest at the end.

Now that I know, in my opinion, TDD was pretty amazing and changed our industry.

... hmm, just looked it up. According to some sites on the web, TDD was created by Kent Beck as apart of Extreme Programming in the 90's and automated testing is a big part of TDD. Having lived through that era, thinking back, would say that TDD did help to popularize automated testing. It made us realize that focusing a ton on writing tests had a lot of benefits (and yeah, most of us didn't do the test first development part).

But this is kind of splitting hairs on what TDD is, not too important.

Hmm, not so sure TDD is a failed paradigm. Maybe it isn't a pancea, but it is seems like it's changed how software development is done.

Especially for backend software and also for tools, seems like automated tests can cover quite a lot of use cases a system encounters. Their coverage can become so good that they'll allow you to make major changes to the system, and as long as they pass the automated tests, you can feel relatively confident the system will work in prod (have seen this many times).

But maybe you're separating automated testing and TDD as two separate concepts?

True, keeping a reader is engaged is important, but at least for me, don't want spin on the actual facts. Want to know what the actual facts are and so I can make an informed decision. Otherwise, it's just the writer using salesmanship to sell their own personal beliefs.

And, for the writer perspective, spin is definitely a powerful technique (seems to be changing America to being more polarized), but for me personal, would like to think I try to see though it as much as possible (in any form, coming from the politically left or right).

Agreed, words matter. There are a lot of smart people out there, and the writer of this site makes me skeptical when he/she exaggerates, omits or spins info. Tell us all the facts at least, so we can trust you.

Thanks! And in terms of heated glove/mitten tech, have a pair of heated mittens already, the Thxtoms brand (although, they're discontinued): https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CDLN91CN

The tech definitely works, and these were, at the time, just another relatively-cheap, but decently-well reviewed pair. Yeah in fact, on their own, they aren't that thick or durable, but when the heat is turned on, they are plenty warm. Seems like almost any decent pair of heated mittens/gloves would work well.

For me at least, the iron-oxide heat-packs work pretty well too, but they typically don't heat the fingers too well, so when its really cold, the main parts of my hands are warm, but my fingers aren't. It's not that bad, and it's easy to heat up the fingers by curling them around the heat pack, but with a heated glove, the heat typically reaches the fingers, so you don't really have to do anything and can just completely forget about your hands - but yeah, if I was loosing gloves often, maybe heated gloves would be a net waste compared to heat packs:)

Recently, bought a pair of heated liners to go under an oversized pair of gloves - I have Leki ski-gloves that directly attach to the ski poles, and they don't currently have a heater option, so am trying this instead. This are the heated liners: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B082XXKXCP

They're nothing special, but by my initial tests, they seem pretty warm under my gloves. Will know more tomorrow:)

Yeah, am sure these the cheap brands don’t have good batteries. But, have found after a year of using them, they are usually good enough. Unless you’re doing something like ice fishing, almost all outdoor activities take about 1-4 hours, and they last about 4-5 hours on a mix of high/medium. Have only run out a couple of times, and that’s because I was lazy and didn’t charge them before going out. Also, the battery type used for almost all these heated devices is the same, 7.4 volts. Have bought a couple pairs of replacements that also work pretty well (and have bought ones with larger storage capacities as well as smaller ones for skiing as I don’t want the extra bulk). The brand of heated socks I’ve tried are the ones recommended online, Snow Deer and Dr Warm.

Snow Deer have better electronics: The main button requires you to hold it down in order to turn it off and on. This is big deal because it’s easy to accidentally press the button when you’re out and about. But, unlike what all the review say, I find them uncomfortable. They have a piece of wiring that runs along the top of the foot that digs in (and have tried two different pairs, same thing. Have returned them both).

Dr. Warm is more comfortable (not perfect, but for hiking, good enough). But the problem is the main button doesn’t require a long press to turn them off, so sometimes, you’ll find they’ve turned off by accident (or more importantly, turned on and you’ve drained the battery). Still, comfort is more important, and there are ways to get around the button issue, so these are the ones I use daily - will keep the batteries unplugged until needed.

And like someone else said, if all else fails, get a nicer brand, one that is $200+.

Good reminder. Actually, I’m there with you, already have mittens, and they are warmer than my gloves (although, my fingers still get cold, even in them).

But also, kind of don’t like how they make me look like a teenager, and I already look young for my age, don’t need any help in this department:) have been trying to find a glove-solution that is still warm. Have just tried some heated gloves, they seem pretty good, but early still

Moved a year ago from California to northern Michigan. To add to this list, specifically regarding "Do NOT get wet and cold":

o If you're walking out in the cold, have many different ways to keep your feet and your hands warm, because usually, you'll have a good-enough coat and winter-pants that'll keep your core relatively warm, but it's the very ends of your extremities that get cold (just got a small amount of frost bite on my toes the other day).

o On top of really thick gloves and socks, can buy some battery-heated versions of both. These aren't just gimmicks, they work wonders! As do the standard handwarmers and toewarmers

o Get real winter boots, these are water proof and insulated, so your feet won't get wet, and will resist the cold for longer (didn't learn this one until recently. Yeah, once your shoes get wet enough to bleed into your socks, you feet start to freeze).

o For your head and neck, carry one of those head and neck covers with you in your coat pocket (called a balaclava). Because sometimes you misread the weather and suddenly you've got a 5 degree wind chill streaming over your neck and face.

o etc:)

And, actually, walking in the snow is really nice (so clean and pure), which is why a lot of us here do actually go outside.

Brown noise always does the trick for me when things get noisy, and being very careful about choosing the apartment/room you rent, making sure it's at least somewhat quiet.

Ah yes, and actually, Agreed (as mentioned, formal verification is only possible for "those answers that lend themselves to it").

Interesting that you mentioned Knowledge Graphs, haven't heard about these in a long time. Just looked up "Commonsense knowledge" page on wikipedia and seems like they're still being added to. Would you happen to know if they're useful yet and can do any real work? or are good enough to integrate with LLM's?

Hmm, am no LLM expert, but agree with you that the models themselves for the individual subject domains seem like they're starting to reach their peaks (Writing, solving math, coding, music gen...) and the improvements are becoming a lot less dramatic than couple of years ago.

But, feel like combining LLM's with other AI techniques seems like it could do so much more...

... As mentioned, am no expert, but seems like one of the next major focuses on LLM's is on verification of its answers, and adding to this, giving LLM's a sense for when its result are right or wrong. Yeah, feel like the ability for an LLM to introspect itself so it can gain an understanding of how it got its answer might be of help if knowing if its answer is right (think Anthropic has been working on this for awhile now), as well as scoring the reliability of the information sources.

And, they could also mix in a formal verification step, using some form of proof to prove that its results are right (for those answers that lend themselves to formal verification).

Am sure all this is all currently being tried. So any AI experts out there, feel free to correct me. Thanks!

Hmm, actually lines up for me at least. It was a pretty big news item a few months ago when Salesforce did this drastic reduction in their Customer Service department, and Marc Benioff raved about how great AI was (you might have just missed it):

  https://www.ktvu.com/news/salesforce-ai-layoffs-marc-benioff

At the time, it was such a big deal to a lot of us because it was a signal what could eventually happen to the rest of us white collar workers.

Of course, it could still happen, as maybe AI systems just need another few years to mature before trying to fully replace jobs like this...

... although, one thing I agree with you is that there isn't much info online on these quotes from Salesforce executives, so could be made up.

For me, it’s always having website productivity blockers on all my browsers across all my various devices (and for the most part, not installing news apps on any devices either). Haven’t simplified my digital life, but at least it’s very restricted. Yeah, if even one device doesn’t have one installed, feel like am vulnerable to having hours sucked away.

And actually, still browse the web and watch YouTube, but just on my non-work days.

Interesting point actually. yeah, when spacex was trying to build a reusable rockets, many traditional rocket scientists said that even if you are able to recover stages of the rocket, you still need to refurbish and test a great number of parts, and it just isn’t this panacea for lowering rocket costs (for example, the space shuttle, which was reusable spacecraft, but was super expensive to launch).

When spacex finally got falcon 9 reusability working (and am no expert in this) but from what I read, the pundits were partially right and partially wrong. Yes, refurbishment and testing on the Falcon 9 does cost a lot, but it still brings down the cost significantly (just looked it up, their saying nowadays, the cost savings is something like 70%, which actually is huge). And as importantly, you don’t have to build a new rocket for every launch, and once you get your refurbishment process down like clockwork, you can relaunch them quite often.

So maybe data centers in space won’t be like ones on earth, but they still might be very useful… One idea is that they could become true “space” data centers, that supply powerful computing for satellites near by. This way satellites could get access to much more powerful computing, while still being small themselves (but again, am no expert in this, so maybe this idea also has many holes, for example why not just offload processing to ground based data centers).

Although, I agree that for average people, over instrumentalizing your interactions becomes fake (although, to be honest, most could use a bit more, including myself, to communicate more effectively with those close to us).

Still, agree with others, seems like you're generalizing what is good for the average person is also good for those with personalities that are more at the extremes. Yeah, know a couple of people who just don't understand what people are thinking or feeling, ever. And so they have to learn a system of cues to look for to figure out whether a person is angry or sad or happy... These people need to create systems to make socialization work.

Very interesting:) And as much as I like the ideas behind starship, think having a strong second launch provider is a good thing. Hope Blue Origin catches up even more

Not 100% sure if you mean this genuinely or joking around a bit. Will assume the former

Well, think just letting the knowledge of user failure expand organically is definite a method of deterrence, and some amount of this probably going to happen to some of the users. But to me, seems like it's a question of what percentage of your user base would be exposed to being scammed. Of course you'd want his to be zero, but if it's significant, yeah, probably should put measures in place to reduce the amount of scamming. Even on a purely practical level, it's bad for the reputation of your product...

...Am thinking, since there is so much resistence to locking down android, one problem might be was it was initially billed as a more open OS that tech people could enhance in whatever way they wanted. But yeah, times have changed, it's now a product that is used by the masses, and guessing the masses are now their most important users. Not saying this is wrong or right, but probably why there is so much push back as compared to say if iOS did the same thing (which they may have already done).

True, a lot of rockets have done vert take off and landing.

Interesting, and sounds like Elon:)

Agreed. And even if they don't ever fully reuse the second stage, they still could use this gigantic working rocket as a (probably still) very cost effective to transport things into space.

There should be an in depth academic study on their two approaches, it seems like it'd be valuable.

To me at least, given the (probably) positive affects iterative dev has (overall) had on software development, my personal feeling is it'd be useful for most other types of engineering. But (as someone else also pointed out) iterative is much more expensive in hardware fields, given the high cost of materials, and you need to have a lot more funds to build hardware this way.