strawhatguy
To have a car that "moves down the road and brakes" only, you'd have to go back to cars of the 90s, minimum. Which at the very least you can't do with all the added automotive regulations that have been added since then (which I agree with eliminating btw, but one has to wade through all the FUD that the environmental lobby will pump out, that too many believe have helped).
Then maybe, just maybe, we could sell new kei trucks, etc here in the US again.
But I'll just say there's a reason why the phone app icon on smartphone is of a receiver, when fewer people have even seen one, and how it works is a bit different, despite the goal being the same.
We understand the new by comparisons to the existing.
So they are
I don't know. On balance, the reality is cars are better overall nowadays, but every aspect of our life has gotten more complicated, including cars.
If you had the option of no screen at all, no rear-view camera, and with physical switches, would you? If this Slate truck gets released, that's the closest, but it's still required to have a rear-view camera/screen sadly.
It's practically impossible to test every permutation of code against every system. Maybe AI can help, but practically it'll just mean the software gets more complicated, with more features. And to top it all off, more and more features get regulated, so they have to be there. The rear-view camera requirement in particular, since you need a screen to see the output. And if you have a screen... well it's an already paid cost, so, might as well display other things too.
We should kill the reg.
The gains in morale can not be underestimated.
The real world often changes though, and more often than not the code has to adapt, regardless of how elegant are systems are designed.
There will be changes of course. Yet we are also more connected than ever, whereas the next town over would be a whole day trip in the past. The separation allows for more divergence.
Well, maybe if we get to Mars, differences might crop up again.
In some sense, it's better these days, competition has led to care for the reader that probably didn't exist as much then, since so few people can read.
Like how clojure basically uses maps everywhere and the whole standard library allows you to manipulate them in various ways.
The main problem with the many type approach is several same it worse similar types, all incompatible.
I like go's library it's got pretty much everything needed out of the box for web server development. Backwards compatibility is important too.
If anything the heirarchy of trust the Linux model uses will be more important now.
There are definitely challenges, but I've been around long enough now that we'll adapt, and muddle through.
The trouble will come from humans' reaction to the changes, less from the changes themselves
Saves this old man from typing anyway.
But yes, I usually constrain my plans to one function, or one feature. Too much and it goes haywire.
I think a side benefit is that I think more about the problem itself, rather than the mechanisms of coding.
If nothing else, it means Gemini's team has priorities other than the results. Necessarily that means they will lag behind others who have clearer focus
Then the only way for Google to get ahead is to help promote regulation of AI to do what they're already doing. I know it's coming cuz regulators can't help themselves, but No thanks.
Golang and Claude have worked well for me, on existing production codebases, because I tell it precisely what I want and it does it.
I’ve never found generic “find performance issues” just by reading the code helpful.
Write specifications, give it freedom to implement, and it can surprise you.
Hell once it thought of how to backfill existing data with the change I was making, completely unasked. And I’m like that’s awesome
It’s not like Clojure or Common Lisp, where a decades old software still runs, mostly unmodified, the same today, any changes mainly being code written for a different environment or even compiler implementation. This is largely because they take breaking user code way more seriously. Alot of code written in these languages seem to have similar timelessness too. Software can be “done”.
Maybe I'm odd, but a Google search is even rare (usually use duck duck go) so I don't know, Google may have problems on it's hands. Possible anyway.
The chart in the link below shows employee vs students headcounts over 6 years. Even though student rolls went down almost all employment in the school system went up. Do we really need a +22% increase in Student Support Services when there are fewer students? Even teachers (only?) went up by 2.8% according to this (and again, students went down)? And why would librarians of all positions seem to be the ones whose positions were cut?
Basically, 'education' is nothing more than a jobs program for the politically connected, as clearly the focus is not on kids. And education is safe, because it's hard to argue against it, even if you're not talking about actual teachers.
Honestly I would expect if funding were cut, and particularly the admin, support, 'paraprofessional', and other non-teaching staff were fired, you'd find those test scores approach the pre-pandemic levels.
Will that happen? Of course not. These are politically connected people after all. We should all be angry.
https://steve-yegge.medium.com/welcome-to-gas-town-4f25ee16d...
Diesel EREV semis, and heavy-duty pickup modifications. Sounds like they're running into overregulation issues though.
This is how China gets ahead, because the West is dumb and thinks regulation helps. They've already dominated drones (since it's effectively illegal if not actually illegal in the States to make them), seems the same will happen with EVs.