Mawr
Of course, they're almost entirely unrelated. It's just programmers believe solving difficult problems with specifically code is valuable in of itself. The goal is to get as much value as possible from as little code & complexity as possible.
GW-BX5600 is sooo close to being a perfect watch, but they just had to plaster the watch face with all that text.
Sounds like you may be interested in DeArrow: https://dearrow.ajay.app
SponsorBlock is related too: https://sponsor.ajay.app
Just like commercial aviation companies then, right?
> Nuclear power plant cost overruns by more than 3x.
On average or what?
> Nuclear energy being already more expensive than solar.
What's "solar"? A solar panel? Sure. Solar+8h worth of batteries? Maybe. Solar+enough batteries to guarantee a stable grid? Hmm. Solar+batteries+the externalities of burning fossil fuels to compensate?
> Nuclear waste ...
Let me stop you right there. Head on over to https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/fifteen_minutes and look at how much coal&gas waste (no, not just CO2) we are dumping into the atmosphere at this very moment.
Now go ahead and tell me again that we need to badly find a solution to the huge problem of inert, solid, compact nuclear waste that's just sitting there.
> What if an accident happens?
Idk, what if an accident happens with anything else that's already 99.999% safe, like aviation? Odd question to ask about the objectively safest power source we have.
> Your 32 layers of protection will be blown apart by a well placed hypersonic missile. I hope this never ever happens, but my gut feeling tells me otherwise.
Right. You're getting attacked by hypersonic missiles and your priority is your nuclear power plant safety.
Empirically, somehow Ukraine is not a nuclear wasteland despite their nuclear power plants being very much under threat of attack by not so sane people.
So they get into a cycle of: 1. Get attacked 2. Build a few turrets 3. Get attacked. They don't consider buffing up their defenses or going out to deal with the threats or preemptively placing turrets when they expand. Not without human probing.
Also, they had the same issue with hand carrying resources around as some other comments here mentioned Sol did.
I expected an article on actual prevention, but I suppose it'd unthinkable to consider not eating trash and moving oneself in any other way than by motor vehicle.
But yeah, clearly nobody's willing to rip off the bandaid, so that's not happening.
Most people don't either, and nor do 99% of programmers — hence their bitching that their mechanical transformation of requirements they got fed by someone else into code is now becoming worthless. It was never worth that much to begin with.
I'm very much like the grandparent poster: I love that I can now focus on what actually matters — which features are to be included, which excluded, and how every feature should work w.r.t the all-guiding user experience. All without having to wonder which sorting algorithm will be optimal here or how to wire up a db migration.
Sucks for code monkey ticket pushers though.
Of course it is. That you do not like the idea of something does not in any way affect whether it's true. You'd like to feel special, but there is absolutely nothing special to us. We're just a random arrangement of atoms in the universe. That is objectively true, whether you like it or not.
That you were born at all is obviously completely random. Any prior event by any other party (butterfly effect) may as well have resulted in you never existing at all.
The only question is if basic physical effects are really random or deterministic, but that's irrelevant to us, there is no practical difference. In practice, it's all random.
And yes, our thoughts are just neurons firing as a result of our lifelong training on the inputs we were given (senses). It's all very complex, yes, but ultimately not fundamentally different from what a machine could do.
It's actually much less complicated that even that. Consider that there are only two possible sides to show, and one of the sides has the drivetrain on it, whereas the other has basically nothing of importance. It's not much of a choice at all.
What? That's backwards.
I guess you think that this "culture" is somehow made up and not an inherent part of the job or something?
It's straightforward: building collapses, people die => someone needs to be held accountable. Otherwise we'd be having people die all over. So there HAS to be something like this in place. It's not a choice, it's not a "culture". It's an inherent property of the universe we live in.
In that same way, this responsibility also inherently means an engineer can flag something as unsafe and he's legally protected. It can't be any other way, or nobody would want to do the job.
Also, signing off on a project is quite a bit easier when it comes down to pulling up some tables and calculating some structural loads according to well known formulas. Add some safety factor and voila - it's safe! Impossible for software.
Yes, exactly? That's what makes it easier.
Software engineering has been a thing for, if you squint, 70 years? Comparing that to thousands of years of humans trying to pile up rocks in various ways to make houses is unserious.
Moreover, there are only so many rocks you can pile up on top of each other. Software can be infinitely complex.
How often is the civil engineer asked to add major features to his 80% finished pile of rocks? Or to move the whole pile by 50m? How long is he expected to continue feature development on it after it's been built?
> extremely high-quality very-serious civil engineering work, built over millenia
Translation: When randomly piled up rocks resulted in many dead humans we dutifully wrote down not to do that particular thing again. Repeat for a couple thousands of years and you get your very serious civil engineering work.
The only half-usable feature here is super fast acceleration.
While you were busy getting baited by flashy non-features, you probably missed that this is coming out minimum 8 years late, with half the promised range, seat space, and the acceleration numbers all depending on unspecified consumable gas which you'll have fill up on somehow. If it ever comes out at all, what with Tesla's track record.
BTW, the reason you haven't seen this before is nobody in their right mind would have spent so much money on something this pointless, not because this is some cutting edge tech.
Hahah, the failure modes are going to be exciting.
Uhuh:
> To solve this, we moved the diff-friendly representation to being derived data (i.e. an index).
Coming up with the idea of an index is not a novel thought. Nothing Anthropic described in their post was anything unexpected that one working from first principles that their problem presented would not have come up with.
Except we can't say that, at all. This is just a single bug in relatively obscure code, so 99.99999% of your code remains safe.
Meanwhile in C, 100% of your code has the potential to trigger a similar bug, except there's no path for the underlying cause to ever be fixed, unlike here.
You're essentially complaining that something isn't 100% safe, but that's just your misconception of what "safe" means. Nothing is 100% safe, not can it ever be.
It's especially ridiculous to then compare something 99.999% safe to something 0% safe and conclude that all that "supposed safety" is useless, because look: in 0.001% of cases it's NOT safe!
Good luck.
On the other hand, it might be doable for Oracle themselves, what with all the tests they have to test the AI implementation against?
2. A photo is just what it appears to be. A program's code can't be gleaned from its output. Without checking the code you can't know if it's good enough or not.
3. For a lot of use cases, good enough isn't good enough. A good enough robot in a factory produces unacceptable defect rates, a good enough space rocket explodes way too often.
"I didn't do anything. I asked two frontier agents to make the most of Elixir and this is what they came up with. Please do send a PR to speed things up! But also realize that it's not exactly extra points for Elixir if frontier agents can't find the magic "go fast" switches."