jeroenvlek

All of the things mentioned in the article seem more a result of bad IaC, instead of general IaC...

> Packages go out of date. Features are deprecated and stop working. Code syntax changes. Images are no longer available.

This is true for all code and we have tried and tested methods/principles for dealing with that.

> Someone’s user account got built in, and they don’t work here any more.

No comment needed.

> He was in the Prod directory — and starting nuking production.

Say it with me: Elevate Permissions

This is the kind of content I'm here for. Thank you, superMayo!

Last time I checked ChatGPT is very much in production.

Seems very inspired by Molly White's page [0]

[0] https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/

You're joking, of course, but I recommend reading Factfulness if you want to learn more about the late Mr Rosling.

That could also explain the abraunegg-onedrive (a brown egg in German) package for Arch Linux, which is the source of DLang deps on my system :D

Great work, please put this on a tile :D

Wow, I only knew the house classic by the same title [1]. My daughter would love these books.

[1] https://youtu.be/wT1luDOHpqk?si=vxowAdBXnYJPL7c1

Thanks for sharing, I have been passively wondering about how mathematical knot theory works for quite some time. Awesome :)

My wife has diabetes and her endocrinologist told me 5 years ago that the absence of shel-stable glucagon was the reason her insulin pump and glucose sensor weren't connected yet. Now she is actually using AndroidAPS, after I compiled it for her.

Really happy to see that there are people now working on both gradients!

No? Why did it increase? You know a lot of reactors were closed early. What filled that demand?

True, but I don't think the Kartoffelparty phenomenon will ever fully disappear ;)

Yes, but they could have kept nuclear until the reactors were end of life to have more time for the transition.

Instead, they frantically closed them and now coal consumption increased. Case in point: Lützerath.

Yeah, agreed that it was a bit sour. I'm actually optimistic by nature ;)

I meant that in academia sometimes some theories are taken for granted and land in a blind spot for improvement. But yeah, that's definitely not limited to academia. Technical debt is every where.

I suspect because of the also mentioned "own goal" of eliminating nuclear power despite not having green alternatives.

Agree in principle, but younger people do speak English a lot better and in cities like Berlin or Hamburg it's an even lower barrier.

Agreed. ChatGPT might overtake StackOverflow, but that first graph does not suggest it, because StackOverflow itself remains constant, it doesn't decline in that graph.

To me this is a bit exemplary of how science sometimes gets functional myopia. Conceptionally obvious: Playing with step sizes gives you higher chance of getting closer to the global (not local) optimum initially, because you can scout , but you want to get your algorithm working, so let's slap on a heuristic and let's first converge for local optima with learning rate decay. Then most people in the scientific community seem to forget (for example) about this heuristic, because it's Always Been There and direct all their focus on improving the status quo, forgetting that the assumption we put there is also a construction area. Lumpers and splitters, I guess. This sounds bitter, I'm actually happy Mr. Grimmer took this on!

It says "Smaller rocks flying off into space could create their own problems" so that's potentially more dangerous, maybe not likely, but still potentially :)

You're right, I interpreted "unintended" as "unexpected", because I assumed that if you know this before you do this then you know what to expect, so it must also be intended.

I've known of the risk of blowing an asteroid up into a swarm that's potentially more dangerous already for years, how is this unexpected according to the article?

Or nix.net

Same. I'm definitely hyped up about Mojo for a few months, but this will ultimately fade if I don't get to try it...

Kind of ironic that parent asks for a global standard like HTML and gets 5 different suggestions in the replies ;)

Thanks to this comment by gabereiser: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35954796

Because it was trained on old documentation, but I see your point. My original point was also not necessarily that ChatGPT was correct, but that ChatGPT at least gave something to work with, whereas Bard simlly refused.

No, I suspect it's more the case that ChatGPT could generate it anno 2021, but can't anymore due changes in Chromium (I switched to Edge ultimately) and the Gmail API and Google Cloud Credentials workflow that I tried to add to it later.

It was interesting to see that ChatGPT annotated its code with pitfalls to avoid, that it actually didn't avoid in the code.

Had a similar experience. Asked Bard to generate a Firefox plugin and it responded that it was a text-based assistant and couldn't comply [1] whereas ChatGPT just did it. It didn't work, but it still generated it.

[1] https://twitter.com/jeroenvlek/status/1657195209686683648

I knew this was Sabine Hossenfelder before clicking the link and not having seen the video before (I like her, fwiw)

Not just the solar system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia