he0001

Is all that code churn really a flex? Sounds to me that it a large failure as they cannot agree upon what is needed to be done?

Before AI, some programming could be considered be considered art. There are definitely codebases that are more beautiful than others. But now with introduction of AI you can’t consider any code as art as you have no idea who produced it. Yes, it may be looking good, but from that perspective it’s just randomly produced without the thought of being art. And at some point it will be refactored into oblivion by something that doesn’t care.

> If you really, really want to avoid an aircraft type, you book with an airline that simply doesn't fly them.

How do you do that? And which companies does not have these today?

If you can’t fit into the same abstraction, is it really a “duplication” or is it just a slightly, but incomparable, function?

It’s generally a evaluation of risk and reward. Guess they are counting on US being busy elsewhere. What I hear, the chain of command is in disarray.

Isn’t this a thing for all providers? YouTube definitely spies on what you look at and Netflix knows as well. Or is this just because a TV actually doesn’t provide the content, just the view? And is there’s a difference if you have a streaming device like Roku?

Does anyone know why this is done? What is the reasoning here? Is this defendable in any way?

What’s happening in Indonesia?

Gödel wrote his teorem to test David Hilbert’s endeavor, Logic and the Foundation of Mathematics[0], to unify mathematics. Gödel proved that it is impossible to do.

But you may have a different version of history.

[0] https://www.famousscientists.org/david-hilbert/

It argues of “impossibilities” and also proves it.

Wouldn’t it be possible that not all brains can do it all, but some can specialize in certain problems. But when combined with everyone else’s we can approach general intelligence?

Can someone explain what Trump means by that there’s a ”world war 3 in the pot”?

Einstein’s relativity theory is a model that is quite fundamental, are there wrong parts of it as well? Asking not as challenge, more out of interest.

And what difference does that make?

Can you give some examples?

What’s stopping you from using a single thread for synchronization?

What do you mean? It implements the Future/Task interface and you can definitely use that. In fact you can’t tell the difference from a virtual thread vs a platform one, and it’s available everywhere. I for one thinks it’s much easier to use than the async/await pattern as I don’t need any special syntax to use it.

What patterns does async/await solve which virtual threads don’t?

> My rough understanding is that this is similar to async/await in .NET?

The biggest difference is that C# async/await code is rewritten by the compiler to be able to be async. This means that you see artifacts in the stack that weren’t there when you wrote the code.

There are no rewrites with virtual threads and the code is presented on the stack just as you write it.

They solve the same problem but in very different ways.

Are those the reason for all crimes done? And why isn’t this politically feasible? There has to be a solution?

So what’s your suggestion to help these people? Or we should just lock them away?

This was absolutely captivating! Better than any book I’ve read lately!

When talking to LLMs their responses are always a bit off. The best way I can describe it, it’s like they are speaking a specific dialect but you know they are using expressions that wouldn’t be used in that dialect. Or, it’s like they are way over their head in the specific matter and reiterate things they really don’t understand. Like there’s no substance in what they are saying.

And if they do this for a simple or a matter that you know of, how can you trust their answers in a matter if you can’t evaluate their answer?

It doesn’t get better when they are totally mixing things up but say it with certainty, instead of just saying that they don’t know or admit that they have gaps in what they know. They don’t just get it wrong like humans do, it’s just weirdly wrong. Humans usually get it consistently wrong. Perhaps it’s about what they are not saying.

Would I always be able to tell it’s not a human I talk with, probably not. But chances are that I will know, the longer I talk to them.

I think AI would be a better to use for explaining code. I’d use that instead, of creating code.