8,647 karma · joined November 4, 2011
Email: jerad @ my HN user name + .com
All that matters is whether they agree with you.
The only control you have over this is to either a) work for yourself, or b) keep looking until you find an employer that agrees with you.
My argument is that the number of employers that fall under (b) is shrinking.
That would be more equivalent to writing the code and immediately deleting it.
Except this code is being deployed, and it is still (mostly) functional, at least functional enough to satisfy your employer (their “hunger” in your analogy).
> Why should I use an LLM to write code? It cannot do the job I want it to.
Because your employer is convinced that it can do the job they want it to (whether it does the job you want it to do is irrelevant, unless you're the employer, in which case 100% handwrite your code).
Sure, but again, this assumes both that handwriting code sometimes outperforms LLMs, and also that your employer agrees with this.
I think it’s only a matter of time (again, if we’re not already there) before LLMs outperform handwritten code nearly all of the time.
And, even if that’s not the case, I’m pretty convinced nearly all employers believe this is true, whether it is or not.
So your employer only sees a “middle ground” as room for higher productivity.
> That is what will create new neurons and new connections, which is what will keep away the cognitive decline.
100% agree with this.
The problem is, your employer doesn’t care whether your brain is creating new neurons and connections. They care about productivity and profit.
I feel like the folks that believe we can continue to write code by hand are either in denial that LLMs will eventually (if not already) outperform handwritten code, or are in denial that employers will be ok with lower levels of productivity.
If you have the luxury of working for an employer that either doesn’t care or is oblivious to this, then 100% continue writing code by hand.
Or if you do work on the side (whether for fun or for profit) and are ok with lower productivity, then yes, stick to handwritten code.
But just because handwriting code is better for your brain and cognitive development, doesn’t mean that the industry will be in support of it.
Or, if the stress of doing everything they do is too much, and interferes with your ability to work and do other things you once had the time to do.
They only became a “necessity” once they went mainstream and the world started evolving with vehicles becoming a part of everyday life.
I can certainly see the same thing happening with residential robotics.
I had a ball last more than 10 seconds.
This honestly sounds like a non-trivial strike against installing solar panels, especially if they’re installed on tall roofs.
I definitely wouldn’t want to have to clean them that often, or pay to have them cleaned that often.
If you’re spending only 10 minutes on them, then maybe you don’t have that many, and they’re not up high.
2. Even if brute force was a viable option for solving, an easy fix is to have a “submit” button when you think you’ve solved it (and that can track strikes for invalid submissions).
This is how most of Simon Tatham’s puzzles work, and that works well.
The Price of Happiness (62 points, 32 comments)
Like they do in commercials.
Under "Conclusions and Research Needs":
> Last, in terms of applications of the potential beneficial effects of coffee intake, it is worth studying whether introducing or initiating regular coffee consumption among current abstainers yields positive cardiovascular health benefits.
In other words, more study is needed to determine whether abstainers should start consuming caffeine.
Additionally, the study suggests much of the cardiovascular benefits are from non-caffeine compounds in coffee/tea:
> Although much of the evidence on caffeine derives from studies of coffee consumption, coffee contains numerous bioactive compounds beyond caffeine, including chlorogenic acids, diterpenes, trigonelline, and melanoidins. In large cohort studies, inverse associations between coffee intake and risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease have also been observed for decaffeinated coffee, supporting a role for noncaffeine components.
Tricky was probably my favorite, but they were all great.
Parent is being downvoted likely because their statement implies the “dozens” receiving letters are individually being sued, but that’s not the case.
My 2015 MBP has this exact same issue.
How are these things not publicly shamed out of existence?
It feels like each year lately has been a new Black Mirror episode.
My wife missed that word, and it said the correct word was “habit”.
I also did “baith” (for the same reason as OP), and ended up making it to 16, but I feel like I shouldn’t have, since I’ve never heard of “baith”. I was confused when it accepted it.
Ordered one off Ali Express, and after another couple months, it also started dying. So replaced it with a newer Roborock.
Didn’t bother when the second S5 started doing the same, just got a new Roborock.
Both new ones have been going well so far, and while it does seem to be good for replacing parts (I had another lidar part fail, and the replacement was easy), I was disappointed that replacing the battery didn’t fix the shut down issues.
Yeah, opening with:
> I'm a world expert in game netcode
Felt like an odd way to start the article.
Maybe OP is job farming?
You’re still making introversion out to be something that you should work at to compensate or fix, because not doing so would be unhealthy.
E.g. you exercise because if you don’t, you risk disease, cancer, and a host of other physical issues.
There’s nothing unhealthy about never striking up conversations with strangers.
There are more natural and organic ways to meet and interact with people you don’t know (many have been covered in other comments).
But striking up conversations with random strangers in public shouldn’t be equated with exercise.
E.g.
- Frequenting the same restaurants/stores (HT earlier sibling comment)
- Joining clubs/communities/churches
- Parents of kids’ friends
- Networking: Friends of family / family of friends / friends of friends
- Workplace (obviously)
I feel like this is how friendships/relationships happen more organically vs. the OP’s suggestion of talking to “someone waiting in line”.
This feels hyperbolic. While I would agree that community and remaining connected are very important to overall health, I don’t feel like making a habit of talking to strangers is a prerequisite.
I know no one who tries striking up a conversation with strangers, and I feel like the majority of strangers would be annoyed/uncomfortable with this.
I feel like I get very little value out of what seems to be a mostly fixed/required price.
I know flat fee realtors exist, and if/when we sell our home, I’ll be looking into this heavily.
But I feel like they rank up there with car salespeople/dealers.
My gripe isn’t so much about what we can do, but just the fact that nobody cares as much about it these days (it’s not mainstream and most devs don’t think about it).
So while I agree the era may not be over, it’s mostly forgotten in favor of remote play without needing to be colocated.
Many games that used to offer couch multiplayer (e.g. split screen) options no longer do.
The upcoming Starfox remake is a great example (no split-screen multiplayer options, where the original did).
I can’t remember the last time I’ve seen a 4-player split-screen FPS (like Goldeneye 007).
Can you find games that offer couch multiplayer? Sure. But it’s not something that is a priority, particularly for most mainstream games.
(And as a side note, LAN parties are also largely a thing of the past.)
I’d love to see example of “bad” solutions made “good”.
As a result, I feel like solving this problem is easier said than done. I can’t think of a great way to solve many of the problems presented here. (Admittedly, I’m not a UX designer, so the bar is low for me.)
It worked by having one player use a GameBoy Advance (connected to the GameCube with an adapter) to (privately) operate Pac-Man while the other three players use GameCube controllers to operate ghosts from the TV.
Additionally, to give Pac-Man a better shot at winning, the three ghosts play from a third-person 3D perspective, rather than top-down.
The ghost that caught Pac-Man would get to take over as Pac-Man (which would inevitably result in a tangled mess of cords by the end).
It was a great couch 3v1 game.
The WiiU had similar mini-games in Nintendo Land [2], with one player operating the Wii U gamepad, while the others played from the TV.
I miss the era of couch multiplayer games.