khalidkhair

I think Steve Jobs' quote sums this up beautifully:

"This is a field where one does not write a Principia which holds up for 200 years. This is not a field where one paints a painting that'll be looked at for centuries, or builds a church that will be admired and looked at in astonishment for centuries.

No, this is a field where one does one's work and in 10 years it's obsolete..."

And it's even harsher for AI where we're witnessing the release of a new model every hour these days

> Why did Railway not notify customers of potentially decrypted keys sooner? ... we wanted to ensure the attacker was ejected from our running infrastructure before telling users to roll their credentials, to prevent the credentials from becoming immediately compromised again.

The way this was handled is messed up to the point it's starting to sound hilarious, they could've easily let people know ASAP that the keys were compromised so they can disable them early and Railway could temporarily block them from updating secrets to keep them secure all around in the meantime

Its more like they're *transitioning* to Rust and not rewriting everything in Rust

Am I missing something or is this a glorified iPod Touch with media controls as physical buttons?

Yet another supply chain attack unfortunately

To be honest, I think banning "AI-pioneered" (i.e. code fully written by AI without a single human thought involved) code is still a valid idea since 99% of the time it's solving a non-existent or very edge case-ish issue by adding extra bloat code to the codebase, but what I'm against is banning experienced engineers with good understanding over code from using AI just like any other tool you have to be more productive