4,007 karma · joined May 20, 2019
There's a pretty good reason for that - the base assumption is that training in fundamentals, methods and ways of thinking is something you won't get anywhere else.
You are paying for the extra power draw.
I don't - I did large scale web, embedded, data, and security, but no graphics or games. I wouldn't know where to begin.
At the very least, he photographed and built models of logs and his own yard.
Who signed up for what?
There are many scenarios, especially in embedded systems, where it can happen and you want to handle it robustly, e.g. by evicting a cache or flushing a buffer to disk.
If you don't address this tradeoff you're not really engaging the issue.
What I think we need is a professional, well-informed advocate of freedom who is willing to seriously discuss the tradeoff and concede that neither extreme is ideal.
It's the bad, semi-coherent submissions that eat up your time, because you do want to award some points and tell students where they went wrong. It's the Anna Karenina principle applied to math.
Code review is the same thing. If you're sure Claude wrote your endpoint right, why not review it anyway? It's going to take you two minutes, and you're not going to wonder whether this time it missed a nuance.
https://youtu.be/1sd26pWhfmg?si=onOai_ocxkZeNWP0
https://youtu.be/B_7RpP90rUk?si=HkRBhw95DbbKX9lL
My takeaway is that fuzzing is not just complementary, it also gives a stronger AI a starting point. But AI is generally faster and better.