licorices

Feel like LLMs main sue in these situations would be to work through these essentially nothing-burger issues? If they're essentially just time consuming to solve, rather than problematic, they should be fairly trivial for them to hopefully solve reliably enough right? I'm very doubtful on AI for actual issues a lot of times, but in my experience, it rarely finds bigger issues from scratch without a lot of extra context such as some hints towards what and where the issue is, and essentially full context explaining any relevant parts to it. However I do find that it often find minor issues when the context is small and contained, or as mentioned when it knows what the issue is, and the solution is simple.

I'm sure there's already plenty of work towards these things, but do bigger code bases completely shut out AI right now, due to the extreme amount of unsolicited PRs they get from AIs? I'd imagine if they were coordinated and structured properly on these things, they'd be more likely to be seen as an acceptable thing? I'm just spitballing, never worked on any real open source project, especially one where there's thousands if not millions of users and several issues every day, so my view on AI usage in these are mostly just from some instances where they ban all AI PRs and stuff like that because they are often really bad.

Not the guy, but I used rails at my old job for one and a half year, and used it in some personal projects. I looked into Elixir(and Phoenix) during this time, and Phoenix felt like it was designed for more modern websites, where RoR is built for older and tries to adapt to handle modern ones. It just feels that when you want to do something more responsive in Elixir, it's designed for it, but in Rails, it feels like you're doing something unorthodox or something that is added as an afterthought. Obviously this isn't quite accurate, but it is the vibe I got.

Elixir is also a very cool language in a lot of ways. I wouldn't go all in on Elixir/Phoenix, but that's because there's not a huge demand for it, at least where I reside. I would 100% consider it for some smaller projects though, if I stood between that and Rails, and I wouldn't mind having to get more comfortable with Elixir.

Edit: I haven't used Rails 8, and haven't followed the ecosystem since a bit before, so not sure how this feels nowadays. I *really* enjoy Rails backend though, but the frontend stuff never quite clicked.

How come? I find them nice to allow for certain actions that don't really require navigation, and may want the user to easily return whenever they do anything in the modal or not. I understand it is historically bad due to accessibility, but there's more native support for it now. Assuming it is implemented with that in mind, is it still bad?

This is sometimes intentional. Some design it that way to ensure that if they are going to do a certain action, that they have seen the toast. Obviously far from being the case all the time, but it happens that it is intentional sometimes.

I wonder if it is time to look into some more native support for toasts in browsers.

Some implementation that allows for browser level customization(timing, etc), as well as a notification center in the browser, and that integrates well with screen readers.

I like toasts from a visual perspective. They can look good(not always, of course), and they can convey small bits of information that could otherwise be displeasing to view in some designs. However, god have I missed a ton of notifications because of them disappearing too quick, and no way to view previous ones, or anything like that. I'm not visually impaired or anything, so I can't really comprehend the extent and issues people who do may have with toasts, and see what would be needed to make them accessible for them(if it's even possible), but would love to hear about it.

Not seen any claim like that about misgenedering, but I have seen a content creator have a very similar discussion with some AI model(ChatGPT 4? I think?). It was obviously aimed to be a fun thing. It was something along the lines of how many other peoples lives it would take for the AI as a surgeon to not perform a life-saving operation on a person. It then spiraled into "but what if it was Hitler getting the surgery". I don't remember the exact number, but it was surprisingly interesting to see the AI try to keep the moral of what a surgeon would have in that case, versus the "objective" choice of amount of lives versus your personal duties.

Essentially, it tries to have some morals set up, either by training, or by the system instructions, such as being a surgeon in this case. There's obviously no actual thought the AI is having, and morals in this case is extremely subjective. Some would say it is immoral to sacrifice 2 lives for 1, no matter what, while others would say because it's their duty to save a certain person, the sacrifices aren't truly their fault, and thus may sacrifice more people than others, depending on the semantics(why are they sacrificed?). It's the trolly problem.

It was DougDoug doing the video. Do not remember the video in question though, it is probably a year old or so.