alphanumeric0
AI excelling beyond a human at writing code is not an objective truth.
I would say even without AI, a manager telling a developer what to code or how to code, will never be better than that engineer themselves being the driver and the developer.
For me personally, quality code has a strong human component. Only I know what's best for the code, based on:
1. my deep understanding of the long history of the organization and of its mission and concepts 2. my intricate personal relationships with the users and the other developers 3. all of my hundreds of unique, personal experiences troubleshooting problems, which are always a combination of code and interpersonal relationships, the open source community, and opposing stakeholders.
Until AI becomes AGI (and that's a big if) and you can train it on 43 years of experience, it will just be an approximation of a true person's holistic engineering pedigree. It will always be asymptotic to true competence. It will always be second-best, even with a human driver.
I can appreciate even more now why Elm is so opinionated. As much as Elm is a unique technical, research language, it is a huge cultural change, and I think that is why so many people left. Allowing libraries to be thin wrapper over ports is one example that goes completely against the Elm philosophy.
I'm happy to see Elm is still around, and I hope one day people will see more value in it.
Do we have any idea if they'll have something ready before September?
Since I did not enter the industry with a computer science degree, I was relegated to less desirable maintenance work for the majority of my career. I have twenty five years of experience reading other people's sometimes great, frequently benign, and occasionally really bad code.
Unfortunately, most of my experience is wasted and not well respected. Most people do not care to look far ahead, they are far too consumed with 'just getting it up and running'. It's all engineering in the end. The house building analogy holds. Make smart tradeoffs. Don't paint yourself into a corner. Build exits for yourself: from platforms, APIs, libraries, and seldom trodden code paths. If you can write it yourself and it's not that complicated, write it yourself. Dependencies are a nightmare from a security and long term use perspective. They might be good for starting out, but you really have no idea where your project and organization will take you.
If I were a hiring manager I would value this experience more than anything else. It's nice if you can bang out some algorithms, but I think it's much more useful for most organizations if you can make forward-thinking engineering decisions.
This could all easily fit in the top-level comments of a main() function or the help text of a CLI app.
- What is the API?
This could be gleaned from the code, either by reading it or by generating automatic documentation from it.
- What does it return?
This is commonly documented in function code.
- What are some examples of proper, real world usage (that don't involve foo/bar but instead, real world inputs/outputs I'd likely see)?
This is typically in comments or help text if it's a CLI app.
While documentation is someone's non-precise natural language expression of what (to the best of their imperfect human capacity) expected the code to implement at the time of writing.
Methane has a GWP of 27-30 over 100 years (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warmin...), meaning it is 27-30 times more effective at trapping heat than CO2.
So yeah if you inhale smoke that can cause cancers. Sure seems like a hit piece when you bury this sort of information.
It's funny that it was considered a pseudoscience for such a long time, when there's lot of clinical applications outside of trying to live longer. For me, as someone with celiac disease, I know the age of my intestines are probably older than most people, after constant damage from gluten. It'd be nice to have a cell reprogramming treatment for intestines.
Of course they don't know which is of least concern, but by and large I do see everything they kill because they bring it home and I have to clean it up. It is in their nature to bring it home.
> A bell on your cat's collar doesn't make much difference.
Bells and other deterrents absolutely do make a difference (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2022.85044...)
There's barely any species of concern in urban environments anymore, because:
* Industrial run-off * Habitat destruction * Roads and highways with vehicles * Air pollution * Light pollution * Poisons * Electrocution from power lines * Buildings with glass (actual a #2 killer of birds!) * Hunting (both legal and illegal)
Domestic cats are merely a cherry on top of the myriad of environmental mistakes humans have made in the name of progress.
They are simply acting on instinct and trying to be happy in a world of human creation.
If you truly care about birds I would urge you to:
* stop driving * use no lights past dusk * not use or consume any product that contributes to air pollution * not use any power grid that uses power lines * not use any building with glass * not consume any poultry
By and large, domestic US outdoor cats are not in fragile ecosystems, but they are the number one killer of birds. They roam outside along with other species (like squirrels and crows) that have had to adapt to the insane environment humans have developed.
I've always seen my pets as persons, with feeling and moods. Trapping them inside is cruel. Cats in nature are adapted to roam and explore.
My cat in the US regretably, has brought home a few birds, but all of the birds were species of least concern. Fortunately, there are a lot of cheap collars owners can use to help alert the bird of the cat's presence before predation occurs.
The emissions are net negative for the EV until you put 20K miles on it, due to the added emissions of producing the battery.
After that the fossil fuel engine becomes a net polluter.
This just means the CO2 savings for the EV is amortized over its lifetime.
Not to mention 60K Americans die from air pollution every year.
How do you justify driving a gas vehicle that contributes to that?
On that account, do you lean more towards flat earth theory?
That's a lot of ifs, but it would be an interesting way of exploring interstellar space in a much shorter time span.