gavmor
Sure with JavaScript's library a-la-carte fashion there's a proliferation of idioms far beyond eg Ruby's hegemonic "convention over configuration", but nevertheless React is still more of a lingua franca than Flask/FastAPI/SQLAlchemy ever was or will be. The most popular Python libraries do a thing and otherwise proscribe nothing.
JavaScript idioms pare down the universe of possibilities in a way that some programmers find claustrophobic, and Python is the wild west!
I know it's popular to characterize JavaScript as the wild west, but in that case it's a proliferation of abstractions, whereas with python, it's a proliferation of implementations, ie primitive obsession.
But I'm really putting far too fine a point on these differences. In the grand scheme of things, they are nigh indistinguishable scripting languages.
LLM agents are perfectly capable of "advancing" my codebase down bizarre, esoteric rabbitholes. Meanwhile, the value remains undelivered.
Many crystals, likewise, are advancing their fantastic complexities in the deep, dark recesses beneath the crust of the earth, but does it make a sound? Who gives a shit.
Many paperclips, indeed, can be churned out. Even we can be converted into paperclips, remember.
Here's my homelab blog: https://www.gavmor.com/regular-labs/
Maybe I'm just not that observant, but all these pictures are just... "LGTM."
When I'm generating, I have really specific adherence/performance goals.
> “Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?”
> “That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,” said the Cat.
> “I don’t much care where—” said Alice.
> “Then it doesn’t matter which way you walk,” said the Cat.
(Lewis Carroll)
Pretty cool.
For example, the Lorenz Attractor which, apparently, doesn't have anything to do with the clock.
Diffusion models, surely, are "trained with next-[pixel] prediction", and that should suffice, no?
Then I considered whether the universe of imagery is simply smaller than the universe of ideas—which must, itself, include the universe of images, too.
But finally, I'm thinking maybe images are just harder to benchmark.
Or maybe they're _not_ actually worth 1,000 words.
This allows the maintainer to focus on business logic, delegating universal, undifferentiating concerns to projects that respect those concerns as their own raison d'etre.
Thus is all running software respected as central, and not peripheral, during its development. This raises the quality of the code—increasing functionality, and reducing defects.
But it strikes me as an affectation of technical austerity, i.e. you’re borrowing the credibility of a constrained medium without embracing its constraints.
Again, it's very pretty but... it's a bit like reconfiguring your Tesla to look more like a Citroën 2CV.
I can't really blame anyone involved in either side of the equation--Sindre Sorhus doesn't blame AI, and OP doesn't blame maintainers--this is just the natural evolution of.. everything! That which does not go extinct... evolves.
Or is it the other way around?
Doula your grief.
In what ways?
I'm still using Concourse every day... for fun (and GPU mutex) — I guess I'll switch to Dagger? If it's light enough to run agents, I'm very curious.
I've also made extensive use of Hermes' built-in Kanban plugin, but somehow it's better than Munder Difflin's, even though I've _less_ transparency into individual Hermes kanban agents in "bot" mode.
These were on different projects, with different teams, so I probably have wildly different definitions of done, and wildly different expectations.
But now I might try Munder Difflin again...
Yes, because it was really only ever about communication with myself, and with teammates. There are a thousand different ways of characterizing the behavior of the system, and this is the one that makes sense to me in my language.
No, because I am always looking to expand my vocabulary and characterize behavior in new terms.
