procaryote

If education doesn't matter, you've had the wrong education.

It sounds like they are ready to give up human readability of code for a mostly untested idea macros _might_ help LLMs?

It's certainly the weakest argument I have seen today

what would be a better repeatable measure of education?

Why enforce effort rather than outcome? Just have exams be without phones.

If someone manages to learn without doing the homework, or finds some way to learn better using an LLM, fine. The exam will show that.

Failing people who didn't learn anything during the course sounds like a desirable outcome

Perhaps let them take a practice exam early on, so they can realise they'll fail the real one unless they actually study?

Education isn't a zero sum game. It's highly possible for people to do worse on basic skills without that being compensated by new unknown skills.

Hoping they're smarter than the tests show is a bad strategy for fixing the issue

so your take on declining test scores is that it means people are learning more?

If it's every lesson, every weekday, they'll get used to it

It sounds like the title should be "the potential of audio AR", as nothing has really risen yet, and hasn't in the two years since the article was written

This is highly optional. You can lock phones up at the start of the school day or at the start of class

I've generally started to treat use of SELECT DISTINCT as a warning flag, as it's very common that it indicates bad code

Some use it because they don't understand uniqueness constraints and try to fix it in post so to say. Some use it because they forgot a join condition and are absolute amateurs. Some use it because it fixed a problem for them once and now they add it everywhere

These people seem to outnumber the people who use SELECT DISTINCT in a well thought out manner

You hash the servers because then adding or removing a server doesn't directly affect other servers position on the ring; adding a server just takes some load from som servers.

This is useful because you want stickiness, so requests for the same key mostly go to the same server.

Sorting servers by weight means that removing or adding a server will shift a lot of traffic from the servers it used to go to. A flapping server early in the list will break stickiness for the whole set of servers.

The simplicity of stable hashing means you don't have to think about new sets, old sets, table rebuilds, synchronisation schemes etc, and that's useful because every such extra step adds bugs and corner cases

The trick is to keep the silos losely coupled and small enough that you can understand it reasonably quickly. A component like the one in the article is pretty good like that. It just routes traffic according to weights. It doesn't care what the weights represent. It doesn't care where the servers are. It doesn't care what the traffic is

The team that owns it needs to understand it. Everyone else can just use it.

It would be an awful precedent if you're not liable for crimes your agent commits, even when you've been clearly lax about security.

It would mean you could effectively legally run a cyber crime gang by turning a blind eye and maitaining plausible deniability

So basically you think any opinion about someone else's opinion creates a paradox?

And that's your opinion about an opinion?

Interestingly this happens with people too.

Put sales-people in a box, set up strong incentives and lax enforcement of rules and you get Wells-Fargo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo_cross-selling_scan...)

In that case the CEO had to resign because they had set up a system which incentivised this, so it was clear you couldn't just blame the individual sales-agents, even though they were technically humans

What if both A and B were implemented using fully automated systems that relied on next token probablity in language?

That's not it. I dont mind the article. I judge the person writing it because they are being silly.

"I think I use screens too much so everyone should use screens less" is silly.

I can't really spot the similarities.

It's their site and they can do whatever they like, but it's pretty silly. If you want to avoid screens, avoid screens. Don't make your addiction my problem

Just another reason to stop using chrome and it's related browsers.

If you don't want to hand the biggest ad company a monopoly over web-browsing, start using a gecko based browser like librewolf, zen, mullvad or firefox.

Pretty much... paranoid() seems to be the real durable() which isn't a great look for a database project.

Being able to recover a db without corruption beyound losing the last few writes is a pretty useful feature, and buys a lot of performance, but it would be better to label that clearly, as a reasonable expectation on the durable() preset would be for it to be Durable.

Those are easier in many ways as you don't need heroin or alcohol to survive and can avoid it completely

If it's hard or not is more of a philosopical question about how much free will we have as people. Statistically they're all hard and not over-eating is the hardest.

Culturally and individually we do a lot of things that probably make the food one even harder

If you drink too much, the common answer is that you need to stop drinking. If you eat too much, we are very reluctant to talk about how you need to eat less. We prefer to talk about how it's someone else's fault and how powerless we are to do anything about it, including comforting lies about how eating less wouldn't work anyway, or how being overweight isn't bad really.

Why wait?

If you feel unable to fix your diet without it, and you think it's safer to get on it, why not make it happen?

This does nothing to resolve that

Without quantifying the cost to society that someone's web-browser crashes sometimes, it's hard to make a rational case that this issue is so dire that it needs specific regulation.

I'm not sure making it illegal to sell consumer grade hardware is the boon for the people you imagine

The point of the article is pretty much that you can pick stable technology instead of joining the treadmill of rewriting in whatever the new thing is. When people are rewriting rust programs in GoombaLang, C will still be around. When people rewrite GoombaLang into SmurfLang, C will still be around, etc

750k items in their content management sysem. N independent labs crawling wanting to check that every day could easily give bursts of millions per hour

Millions per hour is tens per second though; perhaps the fix is performance improvements

The voting dynamics changing beacause elected representatives can't plan their vacations like any regular work place is pretty silly