semilin

This seems like a mistake. On the one hand, other commenters' experiences provide additional evidence that oral communication is a vastly different skill from the written word and ought to be emphasized more in education. Even if a student truly understands a concept, they might struggle at talking about it in a realtime context. For many real-world cases, this is unacceptable. Therefore the skill needs to be taught.

On the other hand, can an AI exam really simulate the conditions necessary for improving at this skill? I think this is unlikely. The students' responses indicate not a general lack of expertise in oral communication but also a discomfort with this particular environment. While the author is making steps to improve the environment, I think it is fundamentally too different from actual human-to-human discussion to test a student's ability in oral communication. Even if a student could learn to succeed in this environment, it won't produce much improvement in their real world ability.

But maybe that's not the goal, and it's simply to test understanding. Well, as other commenters have stated, this seems trivially cheatable. So it neither succeeds at improving one's ability in oral communication nor at testing understanding. Other solutions have to be thought of.

I think Wayland is good for more technical users. Going from i3 to sway or bspwm to river feels like essentially nothing has changed. On the other hand, Gnome X11 to Wayland might be a bigger shock.

Unfortunately, Wayland inherently can't be like Pipewire, which instantly solved basically 90% of audio issues on Linux through its compatibility with Pulseaudio, while having (in my experience) zero drawbacks. If someone could make the equivalent of Pipewire for X11, that'd be nice. Probably far-fetched though.

These seem annoying, but I'd argue that these problems are in some ways less significant on Linux than on Windows. If some function of Windows is broken or unsatisfactory, there is not necessarily a way to fix it.

But you can adjust your own system. It'd be unhelpful of me to suggest to an unhappy Windows user that they should switch to another operating system, as that demands a drastic change of environment. On the other hand, you're already familiar with Linux, so the switching cost to a different Linux distribution is significantly lower. Thus I can fairly say that "Ubuntu getting worse" is less of a problem than "Windows getting worse." You have many convenient options. A Windows user has fewer.

This seems like the right take. The claims of the imminence of AGI are exhausting and to me appear dissonant with reality. I've tried gemini-cli and Claude Code and while they're both genuinely quite impressive, they absolutely suffer from a kind of prototype syndrome. While I could learn to use these tools effectively for large-scale projects, I still at present feel more comfortable writing such things by hand.

The NVIDIA CEO says people should stop learning to code. Now if LLMs will really end up as reliable as compilers, such that they can write code that's better and faster than I can 99% of the time, then he might be right. As things stand now, that reality seems far-fetched. To claim that they're useless because this reality has not yet been achieved would be silly, but not more silly than claiming programming is a dead art.