ljm

I think this is one of the biggest missteps made in Go and in all honesty I don't think it was any more intuitive than going through a package manager. Probably less, looking back.

Everything else is fine. Generics, errors, whatever...

In the new world of AI and all the supply chain attacks on centralised package managers, I think circling back to vendoring probably makes more sense than depending on the network in your build step. Which in some ways is always great, as you mention, in terms of working offline. Using your own domain doesn't help there either, except exposing the package if the domain expires.

Even if you don't want to go as far as vendoring (which can get a bit out of hand with, say, NPM), a middle ground is using Artifactory or whatever as a proxy.

Then be more deliberate about when you update. AI may even help here where static analysis doesn't, because you might be able to use inference to see if a dep upgrade is even needed. Unless it has a severe vuln you probably don't need to track latest.

I was a victim of domestic violence, as a man, once a while ago. Ever since then I hate the feeling of things touching my neck - because he tried to strangle me - and my reaction to things rubbing my neck is a tic now.

I was taken seriously for about a week and then it dropped, because it was my sister's boyfriend who did it and he was already going to prison for something else. So why make it worse for him? I got sidelined in favour of that.

My own social connections dropped off at about that time because I became scared. The guy who attacked me was already due to be imprisoned.

So, I was well embedded in that dysfunctional family life, and at every step of the way I was 0 priority compared to the boyfriends of my sisters.

The reason I can't find a woman is not so much that I'm insecure or lonely, but that I need a bit of time to get trust. And besides, lonely people have been paying hookers and escorts forever.

I don't even know if they need an influencer army. I am seeing people out on the streets deferring to ChatGPT for even basic things in a way that Google never achieved.

I was at a hotel bar the other night and some guy kept bothering the bartender about what was on TV. Every time the bartender told him what they could do he went off for a few minutes, sent it to ChatGPT, and went back to the bar saying "well ChatGPT said this." I can't believe the bartender didn't lose his patience with it. The guy was fucking desperate to see some football on the telly and GPT kept telling him he was right to keep challenging the bartender.

Another guy looks lost with his family and he comes up to us and asks where a good restaurant is. We ask if he wants good local stuff or not and he says, he doesn't know, he just asked ChatGPT and felt like he got stranded. The restaurant it pointed out was like 2 minutes walk away. He was like the one guy in the family who seemed to speak english and was probably the one that was just dragging them around on a GPT adventure. The rest of them looked bored, like they were tired of his shit.

If it doesn't work out, it's not GPT that was wrong, it was everybody else. It pits technology against humanity again.

It's not a format though is it? it's literally just an extension to the system prompt in plain markdown.

There is no rhyme or reason to the structure of this file, just like with most things in AI. It's best effort human language.

I've only heard of "loneliness epidemic" in terms of "male loneliness epidemic" and it's framed entirely around young men not getting the attention they expect from women.

The male loneliness epidemic is also known as the growth of incel circles and the influence of supposedly masculine influencers who will do literally anything but treat women both as equals and with respect. And the way these groups work is that they need to keep their membership up, so it's in their interest to keep you away from women by turning you against them.

Whatever narrative there is about young men being left behind by progressiveness, it is a big lie over a smaller truth (the system fails everyone and now it is sometimes failing young white men, in terms of education). Not so different to the great replacement theory I would imagine, but based on gender not race/religion.

Disingenuous analogy, because you're taking the work of a carpenter and then jumping all the way to a Star Trek style replicator, which is daft.

The jump from writing code by hand to having a machine learning algorithm compute code for you is not the same as that. We had tags, syntax highlighting, auto-completion, word suggestion (via dictionary), intellisense, enhanced auto-completions via snippets, natural language processing, language servers, etc. etc. throughout the decades and an LLM is still not a Star Trek style replicator.

Now, it might have taken a blacksmith a hell of a long time to work various kinds of metal to order, but then someone got the idea of creating a mould so you could make more of them at once. Then later on technology advances and you can now machine it to ridiculously high precision with CNC. Now the person who writes CNC code for a high precision part might not be the same person who has to work another metal part manually.

Did the machines do that or did they? And why exactly does that distinction matter? Half the code I write depends on stuff hundreds or thousands of others have built before me.

I imagine that, if you're in the US, it is seriously scary. Nobody is safe, not even in FAANG. Probably FAANG is the worst place to be now if you care about stability but it was never great before that (stack ranking, firing quotas, etc.). At least you had the idea that performance would keep you safe, but now it doesn't.

I'm not sure how much that translates in other countries where protections for workers are stronger and companies have different operating models. Not to say it's without trade-offs, you might feel safer over in Europe but you're never gonna see US-style compensation, and the concept of becoming a millionaire (and a new startup founder with ex-FAANG credentials) because you joined a startup at the right time is practically non-existent.

Yeah, body shops existed before AI came around and your job in one of those is literally just to churn through tickets and get them across the board as fast as possible. Pure production line stuff. AI comes in and turns that to 11.

If you're looking for a decent job with even an ounce of creativity then an agency/consultancy shop is rarely the place you want to be and I can't see it getting any better.

We went heavy on AI at my place of work, like many did, but not really to the level of being AI-pilled and orchestrating dozens of agents and shit like that. It's still a force multiplier if you just use AI to walk through something one task at a time and use the spare time in between to collaborate on bigger picture stuff and think a bit beyond the code alone.

GPT does seem to stay out of the way and get things done. Only thing I notice is that the question tool/elicitation doesn't work that well any more so the thing doesn't stop to wait for input.

But I wonder if that's intentional because it can keep computing while you are answering, so long as your steer aligns well enough with the direction it wants to go. Better than letting a cache go cold and burning compute on bringing it all back up.

AI reproducing Xtranormal video clips like NodeJS Is Web Scale should be the new benchmark.

If the dialogue is slop and not like the old memes then it fails.

I said this in another comment, but an AI blog author is never going to reveal their 'source' that way. Mostly because it'd be a rubbish prompt or one that is loaded with a predetermined conclusion.

I think you have to take the output as read and decide accordingly. If it looks like low effort AI writing then it's not much better than spam.

I think the the top-voted post being all about the provenance of the article says something about where HN's voting mentality lies - we are not prioritising the substance of the post but how it was produced.

I understand this, I just think that 'share the prompt' will never get a result. Either the prompt is total dogshit or you learn that it was written in a certain way to create a narrative. That's information the author will never reveal.

Like I say, slop is slop. It's easy to detect. This post and the OP's actual website is basically just a few AI blog posts. I would just treat it as spam and disengage.

Seeing some legitimate executive accountability would be lovely in this day and age, but even fines going into the billions of euros are still just the cost of doing business in a ridiculously lucrative space. That they also happen to dominate by oligopoly.

Why would you want n people to compute an AI prompt independently instead of reading the output once? And why would that be better?

At least criticise the article on merit and not some 'let me google that for you' high horse. If it's slop it's slop, but let the votes speak for that.

I love how the 'unsloppify' button changes the theme but nothing else, and also messes with the layout enough that you can't actually toggle it without scrolling and repositioning your cursor.

The annoying thing with Finder is when you're in a folder, you start to search, and then it defaults to "This Mac" and not the god damn folder you're in.

Bloody daft.

AI is literally state sponsored so I don't see that happening unless the AI turns against the sponsor.

Wait until OpenAI or Anthropic exploit FAANG.

If he's lost the confidence of the board and does that, how much is his company worth?

Going cold turkey on Twitter (and Facebook and the like) was amazing, but the problem for a while was that you'd still end up browsing it by proxy because it would all get screenshotted for Reddit.

It's been a long time since I've seen them (thank god), but the worst culprits were subs like facepalm, white people twitter, leopards ate my face, and pretty much any left-leaning or liberal sub.

They did a fantastic job of platforming the ideologies they stand against simply by screenshotting the most vocal advocates and talking heads and sharing them so commenters could get angry. That shit lived rent free in the subscribers' heads to an unhealthy degree and for everybody who hate-engaged, there were plenty more who saw it as an introduction.

One day I'll do for Reddit what I did for the rest of social media but for now it's easy enough to stay off Popular and All and just stick with the smaller subs with a specific subject matter.

Is a client or investor going to have a conversation with an AI CEO and then negotiate funding?

VC: "Hi, I'll offer you $3.75 for 95% equity and a load bearing position on the board"

CEO Bot: "You're absolutely right. Agreed!"

The irony is that S3 is a database, so the first assertion that there is no database is fundamentally incorrect.

Because hiring managers and HR have different incentives and it's therefore in their interest to play the game.

See: every manager and CEO that gets a bonus from cutting down head count or keeping the hiring budget as low as possible.

The problem is that Musk acquired Cursor and therefore Cursor has zero credibility.

I don't care about what they say because of who they sold out to

Except that YAML in almost every devops or CI workflow is YAML plus obscure bash oneliners.

Or it's an obscure bash oneliner hidden in another repository as a package that you can depend on, which is either wrapped by another YAML config or maybe some JS.

I don't think the criticisms of Jenkins compare because Jenkins is really much more than a CI layer, predates the concept of devops and our modern understanding of CI/CD, and it has a lot of complexity to make that work. That was back when you'd have IT teams provisioning your servers for you and shit.

This describes a product with no vision or purpose.

People have to take 'no' for an answer sometimes, even if they don't accept it. You can't really 'gatekeep' your own product.

I'm quite partial to SourceHut as well but tbh I don't care about contributors and I like it because it is deliberately low-tech.

Maybe the CI could be a bit better (secrets management will sting you if you don't read the docs first), but that is also pretty no-nonsense and gets the job done.

If you like no-frills and an expectation that you know what you're doing, it's pretty sweet.

Would probably scare off most collaborators though but that, IMO, is part of the appeal. If you want to contribute then it's more likely you're invested and not driving by.

Also I like that it has a concept of projects so you can group repos together (which on GH would normally require creating an organisation account). And a repo can be public but unlisted, so it's open but not drawing attention.

And they can keep training their own models off of the code, and on private repos too.

AI makes investors/shareholders go brrr.

Github has had a pretty spotty track record for uptime for a very, very long time. It didn't get any better when MS bought it out.

It has really just coasted on GH's network effect because everybody uses GH for git by default. It doesn't really have much direct competition and anything that does offer something like GH just doesn't have the same mindshare.

In that way, GH became more like MS.

There aren't that many good ways to mentor or share experience in a team without pairing though. Sometimes it's just better to sit down with someone and directly collab, and let the person with less experience do the driving so they get the muscle memory. This is an easy transfer of skill and knowledge and it works well because it's hands on.

AI doesn't make that very easy if you're just two people staring at an agent, but I think a lot of people who aren't already senior are going to hit a wall they can't climb when their experience limits what they are capable of doing with AI.

As with many things, usually the bad experiences with collaborative methods come from a specific implementation and those experiences become the bias.