youknownothing

Anecdotical evidence is not just useless, it's deceiving. I only know one person who voted for Brexit, and it's a low-40s Scottish lawyer who lives in South West London (the posh part). And he's still alive. It doesn't mean anything.

Are you saying that 52% of British people are retired?

It's surviving *for now*. This pace isn't sustainable, they know it, but they need to pretend until the IPO. That's when they'll start worrying about quality. The pace of feature creation is going to decrease the moment they float.

Remember Facebook's original motto: Go fast and break things. That's where the speed is coming from.

Anthropic's speed of development is about 20% AI and 80% technical debt. We all could be faster if we stopped trying to build things right.

Once Anthropic floats, I predict a screeching halt in feature development to fix all the technical debt that they're accumulating.

"We treated code as permanent because the labor to produce it was the bottleneck."

I don't think that's true. We treated code as permanent because we considered code to be the source of truth. Computers don't run documents, computers run code. If the requirements document contradicted the code, then the default was to assume that the requirements document was wrong.

You can't separate code from spec because the code is the spec.

Am I the only one who thinks this is just another carefully orchestrated publicity stunt? like all the noise they made about Mythos that turned out to be a big nothingburger?

The AI bubble is beginning to show signs of being about to burst (or at least deflate), so they need new sources of hype. Nothing calls for interest as the threat of a ban.

People who think that "software engineering" and "writing code" are the same thing will indeed be out of a job. People who understand the difference will continue to thrive.

Thinking that software engineers can be replaced by AI is like thinking that mathematicians can be replaced by calculators.

To be fair, considering that there are minerals in the Moon that don't exist on Earth, it's normal that the human body experiments an allergic reaction to a set of substances that it hasn't ever been exposed to during thousands of years of evolution.

Isn't this going to break a lot of React Router navigation? Are they going to manually check every website to see if their manipulation of the history is legit or spammy?

I'll probably get a lot of hate mail for this but here goes nothing... Despite what many people like to claim, you cannot prove that a program has no bugs. That means proving the absence of bugs, and you cannot prove a negative. The best thing you can do is fail to find a bug, but that doesn't mean it isn't there.

Before everyone starts blabbing about formal verification, etc., consider this: how do you know that you didn't make a mistake in your formal verification? IOW, how do you know your formal verification is bug-free? Answer: you don't. Or if you try to formally verify your formal verification then you're just translating the problem to a new layer. It's just a chain of proofs that is always ultimately based on an unproven one, which invalidates the whole chain.

You can get asymptotically close to zero-bug proof, but you can never get there 100% of the way.

Is this the digital version of Supersize Me?

I must confess this is an odd decision. It's true that the drop in engagement is abismal (97% reduction is ouch). However, given that they're still posting in other sites, what's the marginal cost of keeping X in the equation? Presumably they're using some aggregator where you compose the post once and it gets automatically posted to BlueSky, Mastodon, Thread, etc., what's the cost of keeping X?

YES! I get the point of mobility and all that but I wish someone would give a ticket to some of those a-holes. Honestly, town halls have been looking the other way for far too long on this matter.

Thank you, I'm a cyclist too and I always try to respect pedestrians' space, and it really pisses me off when people don't. In many cities cycling on pavement is not allowed, yet some cyclists do it... which I'd be fine with, provided they understand that they're doing something they're not supposed to be doing and that they have no priority. But when they're invading pedestrian space like that AND ring the bell as if people were supposed to be making way for them, I literally want to throw a stick in their wheels.

I like the mindset, it reminds me of "Your code as a crime scene" by Adam Tornhill: https://www.adamtornhill.com/articles/crimescene/codeascrime...

Also, very tangentially, to the notion of the Developer's Legacy Index: https://www.javaadvent.com/2021/12/using-jgit-to-analyse-the...

I don't think this has anything to do with dogfooding. As the author says, dogfooding is about consuming your own product. You can consume Claude Code and still be a reasonable engineer. It's difficult to tell what's actually happening without an insider view but, IMHO, this is just the typical go-fever of start-up thinking: produce loads of functionality as quickly as possible and don't think about quality. It was try before AI, and it will be true after AI.

Also, to those who say "this is proof that code quality doesn't matter any more", let's have this chat 5 years from now when they're crumbling under the weight of their own technical debt :)

"I never saw most of the offending ads because of my adblocker"

interesting that someone looking to make some (modest) money with AdSense is blocking ads...

yeah, that too, good point.

This is unnecessarily incendiary, didn't get passed the first paragraph because this is so misleading:

> Oracle [...] has filed thousands of petitions for H-1B visas in the past two fiscal years, even as it lays off thousands of American workers

Oracle is laying off workers of _all_ nationalities, not just Americans. I know people at Oracle with H1B visas that were laid off. Trying to paint it as if they're replacing Americans with foreigners is just unnecessary fear mongering.

maybe they've changed the page since you checked but there are two requirements, the second one being: - You’ve enabled extra usage

If you haven't, then you don't get the credit.

IANAL but mens rea is a serious consideration here. A prosecutor would have to prove that you have knowingly and wilfully committed the crime in order to be convicted, so unmarked cars are in practice out of scope.

I think the main implication is that you won't be able to use any drone recordings for legal action against ICE unless you can prove that you recorded from further than 3,000 feet (one hell of a camera) or that you did it "accidentally", e.g. I was just filming my friends and ICE agents suddenly busted out of an unmarked car that happened to be within the frame. Even then, you'd have to stop recording pretty soon because at that point they could argue that it becomes wilful recording.

I don't know how you connected one thing over the other... that's a leap pretty in line with your username :)

Well, I'm happy about NASA's idea for private space stations. Maybe I'm not happy with the timing, but I definitely think that this is the future. If you make space stations a valid, self-sustaining industry, that frees up budget for NASA to pursue other non-economically viable missions like going to the Moon and to Mars. It's like someone else's comment about the space shuttle: I was sad to see it go, and maybe it was premature, but private space transport is a more economical way of reaching space.

I'm guessing that for this to work you need to be able to selectively refresh parts of the screen at different rates? a 1Hz refresh rate would be rubbish just to follow the mouse cursor, so at least that part of the screen needs to refresh faster. However, it does make sense for the parts of the screen that are mostly static. Looking at my screen as I type this, the only part that needs a high-refresh rate is the text-box where I'm typing (I can type several keys per second so I wouldn't want a refresh rate of 1 Hz). However, the rest of the screen is not changing at all so a slow refresh is perfectly fine.

This is a great time for Apple to relaunch their Time Machine devices, have a history of everything in your file system because sooner or later some AI is going to delete it...

I think the problem stems from the fact that we have a number of implicit parameters in our heads that allow us to evaluate pros and cons but, unless we communicate those parameters explicitly, the AI cannot take them into account. We ask it to be "objective" but, more and more, I'm of the opinion that there isn't such a thing as objectivity, what we call objectivity is just shared subjectivity; since the AI doesn't know whose shared subjectivity we fall under, it cannot be really objetive.

I tend to use one of these tricks if not both:

- Formulate questions as open-ended as possible, without trying to hint at what your preference is. - Exploit the sycophantic behaviour in your favour. Use two sessions, in one of them you say that X is your idea and want arguments to defend it. In the other one you say that X is a colleague's idea (one you dislike) and that you need arguments to turn it down. Then it's up to you to evaluate and combine the responses.

yes: Comunidades Autonomas can only defined laws as "permitted" by the central government under a Estatuto de Autonomia (Autonomy statute? not good with legal jargon), which is effectively a law of its own. So at the central level the law says "in this particularly region, matters of education are dealt with regionally", and then that's when regional laws apply. Same from local laws. In essence, all laws emanate from the central government, but the central government decides to delegate some areas; technically, they could always take it back.

This is brilliant. I had thought about this for a long while, you see laws that are just "go to law 132 and amend paragraph 4, then go to law 24 and amend paragraph 9". Basically "laws" are recorded as diffs, and then it's up to the reader to put up the final product in their heads. They should be doing it this way!

Containers and Kubernetes are not as standard as we'd like to think. They're standard for things of certain size, but for small-to-medium there are a good amount of serverless options. For a moderately sized website, it's easier to just stick the thing in Vercel than having to deal with the complexity of Kubernetes. Of course, once you grow then you do need that complexity, but I'm willing to bet that many people who got onboard into it don't actually need it, they just did it because everyone else is doing it.