em-bee

i suspect they replaced the bot that picks the posts and either the new bot is simply buggy or it has another algorithm that picks posts by growth rate maybe?

if we assume that this is the middle of the day, so i work 2 hours normally, then 4 hours with 45 minute breaks and then another 2 hours normally, i might as well just work 2.5hours normally, take a 3 hour break and then work another 2.5 hours normally.

so no, really, i don't see any benefit in that arrangement.

"software developers are stinky managers" is not a personal attack. neither is "managers are stinky", but "you/he/she/etc are something" is personal. it may not be an attack though if it is still part of a generalization: "you are a stinky manager because all software developers are stinky managers". but the article is not making that generalization, and therefore it's not just personal but also an attack.

i guess you meant the reverse?

btw "garnix" means "nothing" in german. translating the article to german makes for a funny reading: "nothing is shutting down, nothing is open sourced" ;-)

this is undoubtedly true.

so does this mean that the LLM writes code that is so good that the compiler does not find any more errors?

or is it due to the nature of haskell that makes it hard to write bad code to begin with?

or just that because the haskell compiler catches more errors there is less broken haskell code for the AI to train on?

and what does that mean for the switch to python? if the python compiler/interpreter doesn't catch as many errors do we even know that the code is good?

or is this more like the belief if the LLM can generate good haskell code, surely it can also generate good python?

what's the solution here? speeding up the haskell compiler? if that were easy, would it not already have happened?

personally i still don't trust LLM code generation. i didn't learn haskell yet, but what i hear about it makes me more likely to trust that LLMs can generate good haskell code than python.

i believe the future in LLM code generation is code that can be proven to be correct. proving code correct has been a research topic at some point.

here is an elvish shell command that converts a freetube playlist from json into a list of urls grouped by author:

    for i (cat 'freetube-playlist-favorites.db' | from-json)["videos"] { 
      mkdir -p $i['author']
      print http://youtu.be/$i['videoId'] >> $i['author']/get }

    curl -s -H "Authorization: token <redacted>" "https://api.zerotier.com/api/v1/network/<redacted>/member" | 
      all (from-json) | 
      order &key={|d| put $d[name]} | 
      each { |device| 
             var t = (printf "%.0f" (/ $device[lastSeen] 1000))
             if (> 20000000 (- (date '+%s') $t))  { 
               print (date -R --date='@'$t) $device[config][ipAssignments] $device[name] "\n" } }

yes!

yes you can if you do not honor the license that the original was released under.

that's why we use FOSS licenses in the first place

some FOSS licenses are intended to insure that the code remains open even after modification. that's used by anyone for anything under the same license.