hennell

? That appears to be arbitrary eras then arbitrary companies from that era. Do you think Amazon and Google disappeared after 2001? Do you think databricks is now bigger than IBM?

Change might be inevitable, but I'm not sure your list shows or proves that.

Back in the day I had 4 twitter accounts for different interests, I would see tech talk on one, art or photography on others, it was great, each felt like a connected but different corner of the same world.

I left over a year ago when all of them just became dominated by the same nft and crypto posts everywhere. Couldn't scroll my timeline without seeing fake BBC news articles promising "David Attenboroughs best crypto investment " whatever account I was in. I'm not sure cleaning up a mess they made themselves is really "actively innovating", but I'd agree the country thing would have been interesting back when I used it

It's perfectly possible. Two tables, one stores answer responses only, the other just marks off who has responded. No link between them and you have anonymous data but can tell who hasn't responded.

Of course if you record created/updated timestamps on both, insert both records in the same order, accidently record the user code in the response data, take backups in between responses, have identifying questions or just don't have that many people responding it's easy/not hard to reverse engineer.

But it's quite possible to do right, I did it quite effectively almost by mistake years ago. Sent a customer survey out with generated codes as identifiers recorded with answers. Before sending reminder emails a script grabbed the codes, marked the customer as responded and wiped the code (so I could just get future responses where code was not null to mark next people off). Although I had timestamps the script meant customers were updated in blocks, there really wasn't any data to link them.

I know because the Boss was not happy he couldn't find out which customer had said what, and I had to point out all the communication (with customers and me) called it an anonymous survey, so why would I have saved them?

So it is possible, just not easy even if you intend it, and it's often not intentional...

I don't trust anonymous surveys either now...

Nobody has to drink it, just test it. The analogy is stupid, but it's more like if there was no FDA, you'd wait a week for food safe labs to test it, or you'd invest in your own testing.

The early release channel is sensible, but if you're a bad actor who's compromised a package you're not going to early release are you, you get it straight out there.

Ai runs `rm -rf`

I always found it weird when helping people with excel formulas how few people even try to check maths they don't understand, let alone try to understand it.

I struggle to remember even relatively simple maths like working out "what percentage of X is Y" so if I write a formula like that I'll put in some simple values like 12 and 6 or 10,000 and 2,456 just to confirm I haven't got the values backwards or something. I've been shown sheets where someone put a formula in that they don't understand, checked it with numbers they can't easily eyeball and just assumed it was right as it's roughly in their ball park / they had no idea what the end result should be.

Then again I've also seen sheets where a 10% discount column always had a larger number than the standard price so even obviously wrong things aren't always checked.

To be fair npm makes (made?) it weirdly hard to use lock files so a lot of people did that by mistake. And when you do use lock, it reinstalls every time so a retagged package can just silently update.

Curious how it would track more ide things like a refactor to method command rather than cut and paste. I can understand not tracking paste as you don't really know where it came from, but rtm is using the same code just moving it for you.

This does make more sense to some of the big claims "95% of our code is ai generated" though. By the logic here a lot of my code would be considered generated for years. ide auto complete on variables, functions, closing brackets, class names etc. Lines changes by linters and formatters to add so much as a comma are not mine anymore. Add in refactoring and my use of ide templates and framework generators to make common files and increasingly small amounts would be considered my written code.

Don't be silly, they don't expect you to ask the Ai questions and get the right answers. Obviously if you want to know what's going on you should look at their first solution - check what advice they have posted on X...

Someone call the Olympics because this is the largest jump I've ever seen.

I feel like a UK windows keyboard and a Mac has some oddities like this. I've got a zsa split keyboard and still haven't worked out how to have punctuation the same in Mac and windows. @ and " are always flipped and I had to add additional buttons to ensure I have a | and ~ keys because who knows where the Mac thinks they are.

My colleague update his Mac a while back and I commented on the wild difference in corners between finder and word from across the room. I had to walk round and physically point at them for him to know what I was on about, and then he says "oh yeah, guess they are a bit different"

To my designers eye it was the first thing I saw, to him it was nothing.

I still think it's bad and a sign of a change in apple focus/style, but it's clearly not an issue at all for a lot of people.

Said colleague did get cross when he struggled to resize a window though. Turns out inconsistent corners means inconsistent handles. And that is a real problem.

The more people you have the more processes you need. With 5 people the same person usually does the same things or they've seen the person who usually does it do it. So they do it in the same way, know the tricks or who to ask if it goes wrong. Your working environment is usually small, communication fluid, so people just know what goes on and how it works.

As you get larger you see what you're seeing - not everyone is in on the meetings, knowledge in one person's head isn't shared and people don't know who to ask.

I worked on a simple barcode database setup years ago. Originally it was just a spreadsheet one person 'owned'. Then I made it into a webapp that I and original owner could both add items to - enforcing unique entries and validating checksums (plus an API I could querry). More process, but still a lot was in our heads. When a 3rd person started using it, they added something in lower-case (we always wrote refs in caps) and a variety of case sensitive bugs were found. I had to fix the DB manually and started adding hints and validation.

The more people you have using something the more problems you will have and the less feasible it is to walk everyone through the system in person!

Documentation, make process, make efforts to share knowledge. No way around it.

What's the best car? If you're trying to go fast it's one answer, if you're trying to carry as much load as possible it's another, if you're buying for your just-qualifed-teen it's another. But best is obviously subjective, so what about safest? I don't know specifics there, but if you're in the EU the "safest" car would be very different to the "safest" in the US, because their safety studies measure very different things.

Which is the issue with almost all studies and statistics, what it means depends entirely on what you're measuring.

I can program very very fast if I only consider the happy path, hard code everything and don't bother with things like writing tests defining types or worrying about performance under expected scale. It's all much faster right up until the point it isn't - and then it's much slower. Ai isn't quite so obviously bad, but it can still hide short term gains into long term problems which is what studies tend to focus on as the short term doesn't usually require a study to observe.

I think Ai is similar to outsourcing staff to cheeper counties, replacing ingredients with cheaper alternatives and other MBA style ideas. It's almost always instantly beneficial, but the long term issues are harder to predict, and can have far more varied outcomes dependent on weird specifics of the business.

Some kids near me had fun throwing rocks from a bridge above the motorway. Someone's windshield got smashed, but hey the kids had fun!

But the AI has the work to derive from already. I just went to Gemini and said "make me a picture of a cartoon plumber for a game design". Based on your logic the image it made me of a tubby character with a red cap, blue dungarees, red top and a big bushy mustache is not a derivative work...

(interestingly asking it to make him some friends it gave me more 'original' ideas, but asking it to give him a brother and I can hear the big N's lawyers writing a letter already...)

I think I'd put a phone CPU running netbook-like costing $599 still in the "overpriced premium brand" bucket myself.

(Not sure if that's really an apt description though, but then I was out as soon as I read they're neutering one of the usb-c speeds.)

Outside of packages I doubt few of my code bases would fit into this. But the individual domain areas would. I don't care about users in a orders context, I don't care about payments when dealing with imports, no reason an ai should care either. It shouldn't care about implementations if there's an interface referenced, it shouldn't worry about front end when it's dealing with the back etc.

Scoping the Ai to only use the things you'd use seems far wiser than trying to reduce your codebase so it can look at the whole thing when 90% of it is irrelevant.

The problem with that is the benefit of inspiring children does little to nothing for the business, while the risk of frivolous but expensive legal actions because you decide you should get millions for inventing the self service checkout is not insignificant.

I'd suspect many places would still respond positively though, especially in the more creative worlds. Almost every creative was that kid once.

Most 8 year olds haven't met any aliens.

Different type of creator, different type of bugs. I'd assume a human giving me a way to delete merged branches has probably had the same issue, solved the same problem and understands unspecified context around the problem (e.g protect local data). They probably run it themselves so bugs are most likely to occur in edge cases around none standard use as it works for them.

Ais are giving you what they get from common patterns, parsing documentation etc. Depending what you're asking this might be an entirely novel combination of commands never run before. And depending on the model/prompt it might solve in a way any human would balk at (push main to origin, delete .git, re-clone from origin. Merged local branches are gone!)

It's like the ai art issues - people struggle with relative proportions and tones and making it look real. Ai has no issues with tones, but will add extra fingers or arms etc that humans rarely struggle with. You have to look for different things, and Ai bugs are definitely more dangerous than (most) human bugs.

(Depends a little, it's pretty easy to tell if a human knows what they're talking about. There's for sure humans who could write super destructive code, but other elements usually make you suspicious and worried about the code before that)

A utility meant for viewing data? I don't think you understand what a text editor is.

I'd agree that recent features feel a bit unnecessary, but it does need to edit and write files - including system ones (going through however that is authorised). You could sandbox a lot of apps with limited impact, but it would make a text editor really useless. Least privilege principles work best when you don't need many privileges.

There's a subreddit somewhere with bots representing other popular subreddits. Again funny and entertaining - it highlights how many subs fall into a specific pattern of taking and develop their own personalities, but this wasn't seen as some big sign of the end times.

Since when? You're quoting the timeframe not the period under study.

It's also not a study of just engineers, it's people across engineering, product, design, research, and operations. For a lot of none-code tasks Ai needs pasted context as it's not usually in a repo like code is.

(And their comments about intensifying engineering workload also aren't really changed by ai copy/paste vs context).

It depends what you're doing not really what you do it with.

I can do some crud apps where it's just data input to data store to output with little shaping needed. Or I can do apps where there's lots of filters, actions and logic to happen based on what's inputted that require some thought to ensure actually solve the problem it's proposed for.

"Shaping the clay" isn't about the clay, it's about the shaping. If you have to make a ball of clay and also have to make a bridge of Lego a 175kg human can stand on, you'll learn more about Lego and building it than you will about clay.

Get someone to give you a Lego instruction sheet and you'll learn far less, because you're not shaping anymore.

Impacted by phones removal of the pain of being in a queue sure. Due to phones seems to ignore all the comments that this "came out of nowhere" and wasn't seen before "2020".

It seems most likely that with pubs not so active over the pandemic, then operating with more socially distanced rules, new pub users just never learnt the "only used in pubs queueing system".

Which is a weird blindspot for the article, where they reference a normal queue as something from "border control", rather than then thing you do everywhere but the pub. Without the introduction to the system they just use the system they use everywhere else. And don't worry it takes longer because it's a convenient time to check your phone.

I was assuming this is largely a generic AI implementation, but with tools/data to get your info in. Essentially a global search with ai interface.

Which sounds interesting, while also being a massive security issue.

>if the goal is to build up your own strength I think you missed this line. If the goal is just to move weights or lift the most - forklift away. If you want to learn to use a forklift, drive on and best of luck. But if you're trying to get stronger the forklift will not help that goal.

Like many educational tests the outcome is not the point - doing the work to get there is. If you're asked to code fizz buzz it's not because the teacher needs you to solve fizz buzz for them, it's because you will learn things while you make it. Ai, copying stack overflow, using someone's code from last year, it all solves the problem while missing the purpose of the exercise. You're not learning - and presumably that is your goal.

I feel like the take it back approach, just ends with the retailer/manufacturer throwing it away anyway.

Looking at this device it feels like it shouldn't be hard to have a reusable base with battery and electronics, and a disposable capsule that attaches on top but is replaceable.

Tailwind (like most things) is way more complex than it first appears.

Sure the main thing was originally 'just' mapping `.p-4` to `padding: 1rem`. But it's also about grepping the code to see if `p-4` is used so it only builds needed classes. It also needs to work with things like their responsive and state classes so `md:p-4` or `hover:p-4` add the padding only on medium or larger screens, or when hovered etc.

All of which increased to support more and more css features and arbitrary values so `not-supports-[display:grid]:p-[5px]` generates the required code to check if grid is supported and add 5px padding or whatever other values you put in the [].

You can question if that's really a sensible idea, but it is undeniably a pretty complex challenge. Not sure it compares to blender, I imagine that has a lot more maths involved - put probably less edge cases and weird displays odd in X browser bugs.