sickblastoise

I think svelte 5 is an actual innovation, it does not behave or feel like a “framework” to me. It feels like a natural extension of building an front end with raw html, css, js, solving the headaches you eventually hit when you do so.

I date a nurse, I think nursing might give AI an existential crisis.

Jokes aside, nursing is so incredibly innately about human to human care, this is really just more hamfistig something where it doesn’t belong.

Optimist take, the tech is shit and the people like Trump not JD Vance.

Cryptocurrency = Not being used as a currency, doesn’t even meet the criteria for a true medium of exchange.

AI = Can’t actually be used to automate these federal worker’s jobs, it’s snake oil.

Most importantly, JD Vance, Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, although quite powerful and influential right now, are NOTHING without Trump. And as michael Bloomberg showed us, money alone doesn’t win elections.

Seriously this is a very well written article and the concerns are real, especially around the degradation of our institutions over the past 50+ years. But if you put JD Vance, Elon, or Peter thiel in front of your average American, the response will be a more derogatory form of “neurodivergent freak”.

In 1-2 years I’m predicting democrats take back the senate and house, 4 years we get a younger more normal democratic president. Hopefully most of the old neo lib democrats die off and we get more smart charged up dems like AOC, Buttigieg, and the fella from Georgia who will actually tell these rich bastards to stuff it.

Svelte is the only framework I have come across that is actually tackling the problem of front end bloat and I love it

Svelte 5 does a great job of raising warnings for this. You try to use an onclick on a div you get warning to make it tab-able and give it an aria role, and a reccomendation that you should probably be using a button.

Chat, are Dutch people autistic?

I am saying that all people, including neurodivergent people, have personal agency in what kind of work they choose to do. If you work a job that is primarily meaningless work, that’s your choice. My original comment was to say that you have a choice to not work dull jobs, and it is imperative as a nd person to not do it as you will lose. If instead you take a little personal responsibility for your life’s direction, and do work that plays to your strengths, work is easy. Probably true for all people, but absolutely essential for thriving as a neurodivergent person.

> hmmmm

neurodivergent people need to DO work they like. Not sure how you misunderstood my comment to that extent

Ive got a pretty intense ADHD. This article is vaguely offputting to me. I think it makes it out to be that neurodivergent people need to be baby’d in some way.

From my perspective, I think neurodivergent people can’t stand doing things without purpose. A lot of jobs are truly meaningless, dull, uninteresting, especially in the office space. People with ADHD and ASD should not be doing these jobs. You need to find your strengths and interests and work towards that. You should never work a job that you deep down think is bullshit as a ND individual, this is the equivalent of a death sentence. Find something you are passionate about and you can do better work then any normie no matter how loud or fluorescent the office is.

This is actually a major issue in the LLM wrapper space. Building things like agents (which I think are insanely overhyped and I am so out on but won’t elaborate on), usually in Python, where you are making requests that might take 1-5 seconds to complete, with dependencies between responses, you basically need to have expert level async knowledge to build anything interesting. For example, say you want two agents talking to eachother and “thinking” independently in the same single threaded Python process. You need to write your code in such a way that one agent thinking (making a multi second call to an llm) does not block the other from thinking, but at the same time when the agents talk to each other they shouldn’t talk over eachother. Now imagine you have n number of these agents in the same program, say behind an async endpoint on a FastAPI server. It gets complicated quick.

I think your prof’s worries came true on a massive scale

Are you developing directly against your production database?

My current setup on a personal project is docker compose with Postgres and pgadmin container.

I would never think of mocking a database in 2024/2025, just spin one up.

Also keep your lynch pin invariants in the database and not in your code.

Correct solution: stop using inheritance.

I think database modeling is a bit of a lost art, it’s so important though for building applications that do anything important. Love your distinction about the database not needing to be 1 and the same with your domain model. I usually do my first iteration with a few json columns then split them out into tables as the domain model comes into focus … it’s kind of an art.

Dealing with some ex googlers at my current (non tech company) now, Jesus Christ they are culture killers at regular companies.

And he just secured a massive salary increase for his constituents, in short time. As a member of the labor class of society, I can’t help but cheer him and the union on.

It’s not wrong to use dicts, it’s just bad practice when you could use something like a dataclass or pydantic model instead.

Dicts are useful for looking things up, like if you have a list bunch of objects that you need to access and modify, you should use a dict.

If you are using the dict as a container like car={“make”:”honda”,”color”:”red”}, you should use a proper object like a class, dataclass, or pydantic model based on whether you need validation, type safety, etc. This drastically reduces bugs and code complexity, helps others reason about your code, gives you access to better tooling etc.

This looks great, actually using streaming for responses is a nice touch.

Having built a few front end ai chat features, one of the key things is making sure the llm provider is swappable, and that chat history is stored in your own database.

The architecture I typically use is chat frontend (usually react) -> custom llm wrapper api -> openai/anthropic api | my own db for chat history .

Would this be able to support calling my custom llm wrapper out of the box?

Exactly, things like changing the signature of the api for chat completions are an example. OpenAI is looking for any kind of moat, so they make the api for completions more complicated by including “roles”, which are really just dumb templates for prompts that they try to force you to build around in your program. It’s a race to the bottom and they aren’t going to win because they already got greedy and they don’t have any true advantage in IP.

That’s a great analogy! The chemical imbalance thing has always sounded to me like there “are spirits in the system”

I think this is a major selling point. If developers could upload their CVs, exercise could package together the users yoe + industry experience with the users learning veracity + main language. I think that would be a solid product that hiring people would pay money for.

The issue is we don’t actually recognize that there are two very different careers that fall under the “software” umbrella.

One is developing hard software, software that needs to be performant on a hardware level. Like operating systems, low level libraries, embedded software, databases. The ability to quickly identify and apply data structures and algorithms leetcode style is very important in hard software.

The second is soft-software, which needs to be performant on the organizational budget/timeline level. This type of software engineering is more about glueing together hard software in the right way to solve business problems. Leetcode style interviews make no sense here, because the glue is usually bash or Python and it isn’t really doing much besides orchestrating hard software and delegating work to it.

Imagine you were to pause and take an exact carbon copy of the exact physical state of the universe in the current moment. When you press play in both universes, both universes will play out the exact same way into the end of time, and you would never be able to tell the two apart. That is determinism.

If the universe were not deterministic, for reasons like non-deterministic physics, souls existing, etc. you would potentially see difference between the two as they played out separately.

Another way to think about determinism vs non-determinism is that if something is deterministic, then if you have perfect information about it, you can predict it’s future states exactly. On the flip side, if something is non deterministic, no matter how much information you gather about it, you will never be able to exactly predict its future states (only probabilistically).

Einstein is not so subtly telling us “god doesn’t play dice”, that there are no random physical properties of the universe, and that magic (like souls) doesn’t exist, in his opinion.

Free will means we have a choice in what we do next, but if we go and examine your carbon copy in the other universe you will see they did all of the same things you did. Furthermore if we were granted perfect information about the universe and had a good enough gpu, we could from the physical principles of the universe predict the future state of everything in the universe until the end of time, including all of your future choices, hence no free will.

My thoughts are that people are mixing up the human concept of free will — freedom to make decisions based on how you feel and what you know - with determinism, that the first state of all matter in the universe determined all future states of the universe, and that these are inevitable. The fallacy is that free will in the sense of determinism is only important to human decision making if we have perfect information about the current state of the universe, which we don’t - so until we do, we have to keep guessing what happens next.

Sqlalchemy stands out as a library having probably one of the most complete and pragmatic APIs for database access across all languages.

It is no small feat to create compatibility for modern Python features like type hints and async in a library that has its roots in Python 2, it has absolutely exceeded expectations in that regard.

I seriously don’t understand how searching for a file in windows takes so long and yields such crappy results? What abomination must there be under the hood for it to be this consistently bad for all of these years? Microsoft devs chime in if you have any insight.

I do - it just makes sense if you are riding public transport or touching stuff that isn’t as clean as you’d think. Like your phone, wallet, keys, backpack, shoe laces, pant pockets, etc. Not obsessively, but if I haven’t washed my hands in a few hours or feel they are dirty I wash them before eating.

There isn’t one answer to how to do it. If you have an answer to validation for your specific use case, go for it. this is not trivial because most flashy things people want to use llms for like code generation and automated RCA’s are hard or impossible to verify without the I Need A More Intelligent Model problem.

2. I believe this is falsely equating what llms do with human intelligence. There is a skill threshhold for interacting with critical systems, for humans it comes down to “will they screw this up?” And the human can do it because humans are generally intelligent. The human can make good decisions to predict and handle potential failure modes because of this.

This is really neat, have you had any issues with hallucination?

Spitballing, if you had a digital model of a commercial airplane, you could have an llm write all of the component code for the flight system, then iteratively test the digital model under all possible real world circumstances.

I think automating verification generally might require general intelligence, not an expert though.