faitswulff

What you're saying isn't necessarily mutually exclusive to what gp said.

GPT-2 was the most impressive leap in terms of whatever LLMs pass off as cognitive abilities, but GPT 3.5 to 4 was actually the point at which it became a useful tool (I'm assuming to programmers in particular).

GPT-2: Really convincing stochastic parrot

GPT-4: Can one-shot ffmpeg commands

> Still when I ask Claude.AI to double-check the math on our power consumption, it thinks we have an incredibly leaky apartment. Like ridiculously off the charts.

Ah. That answers my question about how you ventilate the apartment for fresh air: it's thoroughly perforated.

You’re probably being downvoted because the author ended up not using c2rust.

You are correct:

> ...each of the 117 drones launched had its own pilot.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1ld7ppre9vo

> Rust projects are easier to hack on and contribute to.

This was actually the subject of a study at the University of Waterloo:

> We find that despite concerns about ease of use, first-time contributors to Rust projects are about 70 times less likely to introduce vulnerabilities than first-time contributors to C++ projects.

https://cypherpunks.ca/~iang/pubs/gradingcurve-secdev23.pdf

Meh, dropping actual human troops anywhere is largely romanticized. I'd bet on orbital drones, myself.

What coding assistant do you use?

They compile their customers' SQL to Rust code. Hence the preponderance of crates. It's a somewhat unique scenario.

I can only remember one major outage from them in the past ~10 years (in the 2020s, not the 2012 outage), and if I recall correctly, it was fixed in short order...and they never released a postmortem

It’s wild that Chinese automakers are getting to equivalent charging rates.

The author mentions Python bindings in the post.

Can’t shill outrage without something to be outraged about

That’s fair, I think I might have been interpreting it as a call to “rewrite it in rust.”

It’s nuanced. Google has shown that legacy C/C++ code is fairly stable in terms of memory safety bugs. That and the effort and risks involved means that existing C/C++ code is unlikely to be replaced wholesale. But that also means that switching new development to Rust has an outsized effect on preventing new bugs. So expect old code to stick around, but new code to be written in Rust with interoperability with the old code.

If anyone's heard of RICE (Rest, Ice, Compression, Elevation) for healing joints, the new guidance is called POLICE: Protect, Optimal Load, Ice, Compression, and Elevation. The key differences being Protect and Optimal Load, meaning don't re-injure it and expose it to some level of weight-bearing or usage.

Yep, same experience, same platform. I guess straight to reader mode, it is.

EDIT - shockingly, reader mode also fails completely after the page reloads itself

China is actually just one person (Xi) acting in perfect unison and its purpose is not to benefit its own people, but solely to undermine the West.

I think I remember that as well. If you read the changelog, it goes through a good deal of edge cases behaviors that they probably ironed out in the intervening time, like captured variables with the same name and nested blocks with it parameters.

It's designed to be a CLI tool as opposed to a TUI so that it's more composable with other CLI tools. So you can use it as a building block to create a TUI, but it's not one by default.

The blog post links to ongoing work on the Rust specification:

> In any case, this ball is rolling! [RFC3355][0] was accepted one year ago, and [a specification team][1] is [at work][2]. We are watching!

[0]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3355-rust-spec.html

[1]: https://blog.rust-lang.org/inside-rust/2023/11/15/spec-visio...

[2]: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/399173-t-spe...

Since getting used to them during Covid, I've continued wearing masks for situations just like this.

> Every developer doing serious work will trip over every available language feature eventually.

Steve Klabnik:

“Just to provide another perspective: if you can write the programs you want to write, then all is good. You don't have to use every single tool in the standard library.

I co-authored the Rust book. I have twelve years experience writing Rust code, and just over thirty years of experience writing software. I have written a macro_rules macro exactly one time, and that was 95% taking someone else's macro and modifying it. I have written one proc macro. I have used Box::leak once. I have never used Arc::downgrade. I've used Cow a handful of times.

Don't stress yourself out. You're doing fine.“

https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/1fofg43/i_am_struggli...

> Maybe not yet, but it is heading in that direction

When people say that Rust is complex, they often neglect to differentiate between implementation complexity and developer facing complexity. The implementation complexity is growing in part to support the end user simplicity. I also don't understand why anyone feels the need to know every feature of the language. You can just learn about and use the features that you need.

I know a similar non-coding founder who was using LLMs to create a full fledged TypeScript based SaaS product and regularly comes to me with high level architecture questions, but also doesn't know or care to figure out what HTTP methods are, variable names are a mishmash of whatever case the LLM decided to generate that day, and there are no tests whatsoever. It's held together by sheer force of manual QA.

...but. It does work.

It took me about 10 years to hear about it, but the IETF tried to deprecate the X- prefix back in 2012: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6648

It's a Mastodon post

You can also click the eye icon in the top right to auto expand all the comments in the thread.

Oh huh, my brain went to peng 碰 for 碰到 first, meaning "to collide."

It’s a literal launch!

I wonder how many tons of CO2 that amounts to. Google Gemini estimated 125,000 tons of carbon emissions, but I don’t have the know-how to double check it.