eitland

In my case it is rarely that I use LLM to write comments but rather I frequently use an LLM on my finished comment to fix things I miss as a non native speaker.

The content of the comment is my unique opinion and my unique writing and I mostly also make sure to remove stupid things like directional quotation marks.

But yes, it is possible to be very much human but also trigger certain peoples AI detectors.

This scared me until I realized it is about raindrop.ai, not raindrop.io.

(Raindrop.io is a bookmark service that AFAIK has "take money from people and stores their bookmarks" as its complete business model.)

That is interesting, but I am already aware of it.

For anyone who wonder about why, it is meant to help us as programmers avoid shooting ourselves in the feet, not as some kind of unbreakable enforcement.

In Java you can use final[1]. And yes, if final points to an ArrayList you can change it, but you can also use final together with immutable data structures[2].

[1]: https://www.baeldung.com/java-final

[2]: https://www.baeldung.com/java-immutable-list

I have, with minimal time invested (half an hour here and there while commuting or waiting for something).

And it was very useful because

- I realized it wouldn't sell well anyway,

- but it did scratch my itch.

I now see that some accounts get access to copilot chat on the new address and some don't.

Copilot itself blamed it on "compliance" yesterday but so far no explanation as to why it works on one paying customer and not on another paying customer in the same country :-/

No. You have just missed the two last steps. Here is the full explanation, and it is the same as it has always been on HN:

1. Make prototype

2. Magic happens here

3. Make lots of $$$

Great for prototyping only makes it easier to get to step 2, but done correctly, it certainly does that.

As proven by the nice app I have running on my laptop, but probably won't make any money from.

Except any plain file server that you can connect to via ordinary protocols?

"The practice of System and Network administration" by Tom Limoncelli and Christine Hogan[1] was, together with "Principles of Network and Systems Administration" by Mark Burgess have probably been the books that influenced my approach to sysadmin the most. I still have them. Between them they covered at a high level (at least back when I was sysadmin before devops and Kubernets etc) anything and everything from

- hardware, networks, monitoring, provisioning, server room locations in existing buildings, how to prepare server rooms

- and so on up to hiring and firing sysadmins, salary negotiations[2], vendor negotiations and the first book even had a whole chapter dedicated to "Being happy"

[1] There is a third author as well now, but those two were the ones that are on the cover of my book from 2005 and that I can remember

[2] Has mostly worked well after I more or less left sysadmin behind as well

> Have you tried any that actually delivered on what was promised?

It absolutely does.

Maybe I should just switch to using it 100% of the time like on Windows. (I was trying to have it the KDE way: Yes, window based switching instead of App based, also an option to switch between windows from the same application.)

Only sometimes it doesn't work. (For me on a Norwegian keyboard it is CMD+<)

Specifically, sometimes it works with my Safari windows ans sometimes it doesn't.

And sometimes when it doesn't work, Option+< will work for some reason.

But sometimes that doesn't work either and then I just have to swipe and slide or use alt-tab (yes, you can now install a program that gives you proper alt-tab, so I do not have to deal with this IMO nonsense, it just feels like the right thing to do when I know I'm just looking for the other Safari window.)

I'm not complaining, I knew what I went to when I asked $WORK for a Mac, I have had one before and for me the tradeoff of having a laptop supported by IT and with good battery time is worth it even if the UX is (again IMO) somewhat crazy for a guy who comes from a C64->Win 3.1->Windows 95/98->Linux (all of them and a number of weird desktops) background.

> But why would anyone opt-in to that?

The answer is there:

>> In case we agree on selling our data we should be able to set our price and get paid for sell, use and resale of data.

That was not what I was thinking of when I wrote it, but that absolutely also was a thing:

I especially remember one particular feature that was really useful and really easy to enable in Enterprise Manager, but that would cost you at least $10000 at next license review (probably more if you had licensed it for more cores etc).

What I wrote about above wasn't us changing something or using a new feature but some sales guy at their side re-interpreting what our existing agreement meant. (I was not in the discussions, I just happened to work with the guys who dealt with it and it is a long time ago so I cannot be more specific.)

I'm referring to this experiment / art thing:

https://www.booooooom.com/2016/05/09/bicycles-built-based-on...

> if you look at a 3d object that you can only see one side of, can you make inferences about the other side of the object? Can you rotate it in your head? Could you quickly be able to tell whether an object will fit in a particular hole, without actually trying it?

Obviously I cannot know for sure what the other side looks like without seeing it, but I can make a reasonable guess and yes, I can mentally turn around objects in my head to see if they fit.

I also enjoy woodworking and repairs and other activities that force me to think 3D, but I believe it would be much easier if I could think in images.

I don't say I draw nice drawings. I am referring to this art/experiment:

https://www.booooooom.com/2016/05/09/bicycles-built-based-on...

I don't draw impossible bikes. Because I know what bikes are. That is what I mean. Not that I can make nice or even photographically correct images of them.

With me I know:

I know if I close my eyes now there is nothing visible.

I also know if I have a good night's sleep and wake up late on Saturday I might be able to see images of things I am working on in the garden or elsewhere.

So I know seing nothing is my default and I know that seing something vividly can be possible.

To late to edit, but I probably started using Google somewhere between February 2001 and July 2003, not in 2005.

Yes. Or maybe rather understand. For me it was a lightbulb moment just like my realisation of exactly how bad my colourblindness was: what is next to impossible for me to see (red drawings on woods in maps) was chosen by someone who thought it stood out.

I'm at least pointing out that I now know personally that there are multiple levels of visualisation, from me just "feeling" what it would mean to rotate a 3d object (it works, I can absolutely determine if it will fit but it is absolutely not visual) up to some close friends of mine that see vivid pictures of faces and can combine them with eyes closed.

For me who cannot see images except what I physically see it certainly is interesting to hear people describe remembering peoples phone numbers as text that they can see (I remember the feeling of myself saying it, not the sound) or memorising my name by mentally putting the image of ne next to their image of their brother who has the same name as me (!)

It really is funny, because I can draw. For example the famous "draw a bike" thing seems weird to me because I can't see myself making any of the mistakes from any of the drawings. Not because I can see a bike, but because I know it.

Maybe you have aphantasia as well. I had without knowing it.

Some observations:

Someone told me to close my eyes and think about "an apple at a table".

Then I was told to open my eyes and tell what color the apple was.

The question didn't make sense to me:

I only thought about about the concept of "an apple on a table". When my eyes are closed it is black. Absolutely black. Blacker than a Norwegian winter night with cloud cover and no moon. There is nothing.

Until then I thought all this talk about seing things was just a metaphor for what I had also done.

But when I talk to others they will often immediately say it was green or red. Because they saw it.

Two extra observations:

Sometimes just before I fall asleep I can sometimes think images of stuff that doesn't exist: think 3d modeling with simple shapes.

And just after waking up I can sometimes manage to see relatively detailed images of actual physical things.

Both these only last for a few seconds to a few minutes.

Does this help?

Using the same arguments people used (use?) against IDEs and I think also against compilers and stuff back in the punch card days.

I am not a researcher, but I am a techlead and I've seen it work again and again: IDEs work. And LLMs work.

They are force multipliers though, they absolutely work best with people who already know a bit of software engineering.

> The thing that this comment misses, imo, is that LLMs are not always enabling people who previously couldn't create value to create value. In fact i think they are likely to cause some people who created value previously to create even less value!

Agree.

For some time I’ve compared AI to a nail gun:

It can make an experienced builder much quicker at certain jobs.

But for someone new to the trade, I’m not convinced it makes them faster at all. It might remove some of the drudgery, yes — but it also adds a very real chance of shooting oneself in the foot (or hand).

Again and again people keep saying this while many of us keep using LLMs to create value.

Agree.

But for anyone tempted by Oracle, do remember that the upfront, agreed licence costs are only a fraction of the true price:

You’ll need someone who actually knows Oracle - either already in place or willing to invest a serious amount of time learning it. Without that, you’re almost certainly better off choosing a simpler database that people are comfortable with.

There’s always a non-zero risk of an Oracle rep trying to “upsell” you. And by upsell, I mean threatening legal action unless you cough up for additional bits a new salesperson has suddenly decided you’re using. (A company I worked with sold Oracle licences and had a long, happy relationship with them - until one day they went after us over some development databases. Someone higher up at Oracle smoothed it over, but the whole experience was unnerving enough.)

Incidental and accidental complexity: I’ve worked with Windows from 3.1 through to Server 2008, with Linux from early Red Hat in 2001 through to the latest production distros, plus a fair share of weird and wonderful applications, everything from 1980s/90s radar acquisition running on 2010 operating systems through a wide range of in house, commercial and open source software and up to modern microservices — and none of it comes close to Oracle’s level of pain.

Edit: Installating Delphi 6 with 14 packages came close, I used 3 days when I had to find every package scattered on disks in shelves and drawers and across ancient web paces + posted as abandonware on source forge but I guess I could learn to do that in a day if I had to do it twice a month. Oracle consistently took me 3 days - if I did everything correct on first try and didn't have to start from scratch.

And it would make it really painful.

But we couldn't get rid of it because it papered over something important.

FWIW, as someone who has chosen to pay for Kagi for three years now:

- I agreee fake news is a real problem

- I pay for Kagi because I get more much more precise results[1]

- They have a public feedback forum and I think every time I have pointed out a problem they have come back with an answer and most of the time also a fix

- When Kagi introduced AI summaries in search they made it opt in, and unlike every other AI summary provider I had seen at that point they have always pointed to the sources. The AI might still hallucinate[2] but if it does I am confident that if I pointed it out to them my bug report would be looked into and I would get a good answer and probably even a fix.

[1]: I hear others say they get more precise Google results, and if so, more power to them. I have used Google enthusiastically since 2005, as the only real option from 2012, as fallback for DDG since somewhere between 2012 and 2022 and basically only when I am on other peoples devices or to prove a point since I started using Kagi in 2022

[2]: haven't seen much of that, but that might be because of the kind of questions I ask and the fact that I mostly use ordinary search.

Interesting idea and I think Nikon did with high end(?) cameras a number of years ago.

Nikon tried this a number of years ago, and I am not sure if they ever managed to stop hardware hackers from extracting their private keys, here are some examples: https://petapixel.com/2011/04/28/nikon-image-authentication-...

On a second reading it seems that Canon keys were leaked even earlier.

IIRC and AFAIK the plans for Israel were made by the precursors to UN way before Holocaust.

Holocaust was not the reason for the plan for a Jewish national home in historic Israel, Arab persecution of Jews in the region was.

> JS is an OK and at least usable language, as long as you avoid TS and all that comes with it.

Care to explain why?

My view is this: since you can write plain JS inside TS (just misconfigure tsconfig badly enough), I honestly don’t see how you arrive at that conclusion.

I can just about understand preferring JS on the grounds that it runs without a compile step. But I’ve never seen a convincing explanation of why the language itself is supposedly better.

Does it really make any difference whether they compared the death of someone who led one of the world’s largest terrorist organisations for decades

- with someone who wasn’t good at debates,

- or with someone who was?

My point still stands: even if Charlie Kirk had been entirely unremarkable, it wouldn’t be right to compare him with someone responsible for thousands of civilian deaths?