jeltz

The agents still write bad code unless my colleagues and the people who submit PRs to the repos I am responsible for somehow use agents from last year.

And, no, it is not a question about style or preferences, the code is messy and contains to me as a maintainer obvious bugs.

Actually rich people think they re helping more than that. If we assume the average length of a recurring donation is 6 months they feel they help 8 dollars for every 2 they donate.

But otherwise you are right, this is done because it makes everyone donating feel like a winner other than few cynics like me. :D But that said I do not mind these drives.

Any rules for how quickly you can cancel one and it still counts as recurring?

I do not think it is the right choice for any repository or developer. It just seems like terrible advice.

LLMs love overcomplicating things so that is to be expected.

Historically thet have done so but I have no idea if thet currently do.

It writes like me when I was 14 and thought I was very smart.

Still more useful than what exists now.

They have a big library of music from tiny bands and it works well enough. As long as you ignore the music they try to push it just works.

Yeah, the idea is over 25 years old here in Europe and is called "betting exchange". Their only innovation is getting it regulated as commodity trading rather than online gambling.

At least it works unlike Starship. But yes both SLS and Starship are handouts to political donors.

Because there is zero reason to sell off parts of FIFA to external investors. FIFA is rich and profitable and can fund everything themselves with cash or loans.

The reason is that one allows you to destroy harvests and ecosystems while the other does not.

It would be way less and risk would be lower (It is hard to reach one 9 no matter how bad you are at it), and self hosting is not the only option.

The site used to not be under constant assault of low effort LLM submissions and low effort LLM comments. That people start getting cranky about that is just normal.

He would wear a leotard because he is a wrestler.

And those people were idiots. MOSS was trivial to implement and an improvement of what was there before. I implemented it myself for our company.

No, while the patent poster expresses their opinion quite strongly I have more than once encountered product managers and project managers who get almost personally offended when developers try to use their brains and don't just blindly implement incorrect specifications. If they have a vendetta I don't know but they clearly hate having to depend on engineers with free will.

That said I have also encountered lazy engineers who are totally fine with implementing obviously broken software, those are a perfect match for the egotistical product manager.

In my experience it is the semi literate people who love generative AI the most. The people who struggled to form sentenced and hated reading.

Yeah, I have started ignoring AI generated stuff.

I am much more interested in it now that it is not a subset of Python. That felt like something which would hold it back and seems like they agreed.

Whenever people stop creating new language with significant indentation. I don't complain about it in Python but I hate when this bad idea is introduced in more places.

But in this case it is the other way round, failure rate is going up.

All forms of power generation are heavily subsidized. Anyone complaining about a particular form being subsidzed is a dishonest liar.

I am personally for building nuclear and compulimenting it with some wind and hydro, but that is not related to what things are subsidized but because nuclear and hydro has worked really well here in Sweden providing reliable power and while wind has a spottier record I think diversification is good.

All kinds of power generation are typically heavily subdized in some way. I do not think this "common sense" strategy exists.

Then you would be exceptionally bad at selfhosting as Github has like one nine of uptime.

So you are pro-bus? Because Waymo is the faster horse for someone in Dallas while a working public transit would be the paradigm shift.

And following Clean Code gives you neither. The book is written by someone with a very limited experience and the advice is either basic and obvious or harmful. People should just stop reading that book.

I don't think any such benchmark should exist. As long as the function only does one thing there is no upper limit. Artificially splitting a large function only reduces readsbility. What would you name the parts? do_stuff1(), do_stuff2(), do_stuff3()?

I have seen very clean codebases with a handful very long functions, but they were no issue she nice they only did one thing.

I personally write quite short functions but I have never understood why people take issue with large functions. Those are one of the easiest things to fix in a bad codebase. It is much harder to clean up after someone who used too small functions.

No, what they failed to recognize was indigenous land management that had been abandoned for many decades. In remote areas smallpox moved quite far ahead of European settlers.