GrowingSideways

The concept of "religion" didn't exist until the 17th century or so. Let's not use it here.

> only recently have agents started getting Rust code right on the first try

This is such a silly thing to say. Either you set the bar so low that "hello world" qualifies or you expect LLMs to be able to reason about lifetimes, which they clearly cannot. But LLMs were never very good at full-program reasoning in any language.

I don't see this language fixing this, but it's not trying to—it just seems to be removing cruft

Ok, but what is the distinction between the two terms?

Universal basic income by itself is just a stick propping up the consumer economy. We need a real welfare state, not the pathetic half-attempt we have today. We must take care of each other.

PCIe expertise will certainly outlive anyone on this forum.

> The benefit being that it formalizes the human as the specifier (which must be done anyway) and the llm as the code writer.

The code was always a secondary effect of making software. The pain is in fully specifying behavior.

Such a model likely would not be referred to as "ownership". This is a relatively recent metaphor for memory management that came well after the concepts you mentioned. The fact that such a metaphor is core to rust's memory model is no coincidence.

> Sure, but now I need to be fluent in prompt-lang and the underlying programming language if you want me to be confident in the output (and you probably do, right?)

Using a formal language makes the problem space unambiguous. That is just as much a benefit as it is a barrier to entry. Once you learn this formal language, the ability to read code and see the surface area of the problem is absolutely empowering. Using english to express this is an exercise in frustration (or, occasionally, genius—but genius is not necessary with the formal language).

Programs are not poetry!

I never understood this idea that you should min/max your typing. The editor should serve you, not the other way around.

Then again, I'm an emacs user.

Yes, it's exaggeration. Modal editing cannot read your mind.

Just because people want to give you money doesn't mean you toss your dignity out the window.

What does it imply that the other term does not? Enshitification is the inevitable result of the tendency of profit to revert to zero. This is basic schumpeter (not to mention marx).

The benefit is that you can allocate arbitrary computers to compute arbitrary things. As it is now, you have to use kubernetes and it's a comedy. Though perhaps the same in effect, there are dozens of layers of abstraction that will forever sting you.

You're thinking from the perspective of the terminal user—ie, a drooling, barely-conscious human trying to grasp syntax and legal oddities of long-dead humans. Instead you need to think from the perspective of a star trek captain. Presumably they aren't manually slinging sql queries. Such tasks are best automated. We are all the drooling terminal user in the end, but plan9 enabled you to at least pretend to be competent.

Again, I don't think most people are prepared to articulate what behavior they want. Fortran (and any other formal language) used to force this, but now you just kind of jerk off on the keyboard or into the microphone and expect mind-reading.

Reactionarily? Sure. Maybe AI has some role to play there. Maybe you can ask the chatbot to modify settings.

I am no fan of chatbots. But i do have empathy for the people responsible for them when their users start complaining that programs don't do what they want, despite the chatbots delivering precisely the code demanded.

https://youtu.be/5IsSpAOD6K8?si=FtfQZzgRU8K2z4Ub

Let's not speculate. I'm the first to be skeptical of government but this just makes people skeptical of your words.

> raw coding is now a solved problem

Surely this was solved with fortran. What changed? I think most people just don't know what program they want.

I searched for "simple interest" and found nothing. What on earth is this searching? I would not put your name next to this.

Edit: I appreciate the quick turnaround. Apologies.

Take the money and never admit to selling this shit. Why would you ever willingly associate your name with this?

Why not just use brass? Seems like a solution in search of a problem.

Plan 9 is just a brand smeared across a codebase, just like every other operating system.

> If so, it is unsuitable for being a database. It can run databases, because those can work without transactions. But can't do native writes without them. Can it do transactional reads? How would you represent isolation levels?

Bruh ask 9front

The splatting seems to be video only but I could be wrong.

It's only a matter of time until the #1 hit figures out how to make this work

There's a bunch of literature about accessing graphs through tree lenses. I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for.

SQL certainly forces you to look at graphs as trees. Do you have an specific interface you're trying to access? If you're trying to use a graph database, why mention APIs and SQL?

I just assumed they wanted to interface with existing json over http apis rather than write their own code. The sibling of my previous comment addresses that concern.

That's up to you. Why ask me?

In addition to the sibling comment, you might also consider simply not using the APIs or SQL queries to begin with. Many people have entire careers without touching either.

> I haven’t seen any evidence that “everything is a file” helps much in a world of web APIs and SQL databases

Well for one thing, such an abstraction enables you to avoid web apis and sql databases!

It is.

It's hard to think of an organization that has broken international law more consistently than the US Military.

I'd like fewer occupiers rather than more congenial ones, personally.

How so? Truth is naturally an apriori concept; you don't need a chatbot to reach this conclusion.