thwarted
Why not? What is the goal of "having an amazing tapestry"? Do you need to do increasing more things in the limited time you have left and making a tapestry isn't one of those things? What will you have once you've "finished" an amazing tapestry, just something to hang on the wall and look at? How does one "use" a tapestry after it's "finished" such that the act of finishing it is the most important thing? If you've finished it, will you get more enjoyment from looking at it for longer because it was finished sooner and thus the length of time you can look at it before you die is maximized? Exactly what you are optimizing for here?
While I don't disagree that we generally get too hung up on data, "It's a problem when the data matches the hypothesis" is an odd blanket interpretation of the scientific method.
And the LLM-based coding agents provide the ultimate scapegoat for those who consider "the LLM wrote this code" to be an acceptable, deflecting response when issues occur.
It likely that no response at all or "This looks good, no suggestions" are not possible responses. They haven't figured out how to detect when a conversation should just end or that no response is necessary and include that in the training data.
Reminder: Neither the CVE nor the linked go alert seem to say that you have to recompile and redeploy your application with the new go version in order to take advantage of this change. Just updating the tool chain and go stdlib isn't enough, because this stuff gets baked into the resultant binary. This is unlike, say, python, Ruby, or java where updating the runtime may be sufficient, depending on your development and deployment model.
They started doing it on mobile in order to give more screen real estate to the content area. This was then translated to desktop apps at the same time desktop screen real estate became a non-issue for everyone (a 32" monitor at 1600x1200 used to be a luxury, now it's mundane). Now no one knows if there is anything "below the fold" without initiating a scroll action, which just encourages people to further only focus on the above the fold content.
Interestingly the response to that was sites adding horizontal "progress bars" across the top of the viewport to indicate how much you had read. And with application and website control of the styling and operation of these standard widgets, everyone is slightly different, which increases time to become familiar.
It's been a race to the bottom, in the name of (the subjective at best) "clean design".
My mom and I used to take turns reading the code from the magazines out loud while the other typed the code into our Commodore 64. She used to say things like "I was just having fun, typing in the games and playing them, but thwarted was actually learning something" (no, my mom doesn't call me "thwarted").
This is a great idea, now they just have to use/do it. Maybe they can use it effectively by cloning the repo and having all the history at hand, rather than continuously scraping web pages with git content formatted for human brwosing.
How was this a great experience if what was produced needed such extensive changes that your own assessment is that it should be thrown out? At what point is the necessary rework so much that the thing being reworked didn't really contribute much to the end product at all?
This is worded as if knowing how the code works and testing it is hinged on it being released.
Australia should put this submission in the circular file. The US government's opinion about any of this shouldn't matter to Australia, especially when the intent is to allow users to elect to use the natural state of no-algorithm time-based-ordering presentation of the content. This is like saying that an impact study needs to be done to determine if walking to the end of the block is safe enough to be allowed rather than blasting people out of a cannon towards the end of the block. Or saying that people should not be able to eat breakfast, lunch, and dinner in that order if they choose to.
> Another worry was that the proposed laws could affect Australia's "reputation as a jurisdiction that enables innovation," the submission said.
How magnanimous of the US to be concerned about this for Australia.
But, even if the hosting of the code is locked down behind a VPN, the nature of it requires copying it somewhere else, perhaps to a laptop that gets lost/stolen. But that is an attack vector and risk that is not addressed by having the revision control only accessible via VPN (although it may provide access auditing capabilities to help mitigate/observe where copies of the code exist).
(Ignoring what "on prem" means these days with so much being hosted and run on computers you don't own/physically control) Then you would be surprised. The threshold is probably multiple hundreds or thousands of developers, way more than "a few dozen". The lure of github purely because it's github is strong, and since Microsoft owns github now it falls under the "no one has been fired for choosing Microsoft" vendor selection logic.
The person (or who/whatever) that wrote the ad copy probably doesn't know the difference. "Stainless" (either grouped with the word "steel" or by itself) is maybe a filler word to lend a certain level of gravitas/authority to the description or maybe used in contrast to "painted"; despite that it does actually mean something to people who know, it's not being used in that way, which contributes to the confusion. You'll often see menu items described as having "fresh" ingredients. I saw this the other day while waiting to place an order at a cafe and was thinking "what do they mean by 'fresh', in contrast to what? to distinguish themselves from other cafes' menus? freshly purchased by this venue or freshly harvested?" You can't tell, so much so that "fresh" is now meaningless. Perhaps "stainless" is going that way too.
This text appears on this page https://www.autom.dev/blog/google-search-goto-links
> The real URL is in the Location header on /goto. Request that URL. Do not follow the redirect.
And this text appears on this page https://www.autom.dev/blog/google-goto-url-fix
> Do not follow the redirect. Read Location.
That's what a redirect is, reading the value of the location header and then requesting it. How do you not follow the redirect by reading the location header? Once you've made the request to the /goto url, with GET or HEAD, to get the location header, google knows you're interested in whatever it is putting in the location header and can assume you're going to go there, if you're letting the User Agent (curl or the browser) go there for you or not.
The Overview Effekt: Time Dilation Visualized
This is the bit that is tripping you up. The market is composed of more than just the these potentially agreeing parties, so there is no case where all parties can even come together to agree. It's rational for any party to break the agreement or be stealthy and attempt to take the upper hand while the visible players are all patting themselves on the back for their self-inflicted restraint. It's rational for one party to encourage everyone to come together to agree, to distract from their own actions to undercut everyone else.
On top of that, such agreement would potentially qualify as collusion, allowing an upstart to cry foul.
It's all game theory.
This is an interesting call out when it comes to the communication/presentation of aesthetics of technology in the book. There's no narrative about actually relieving himself, just the mention that, of course, he has to and this is how it's being handled; the reader fills that in from these few scant details. The need to relieve himself, and ultimately the mention of the Texas catheter, is used as an indicator of how he's able to remain jacked in for so long, and as foreshadowing of expected jacked-in duration as they approach the final stages of the Villa Straylight run (when he purposely neglects to put it back on). So even in the "advanced" technology of the cyberpunk future of Neuromancer, people still gotta piss and wearing a catheter is still uncomfortable.
That they are cool is the only thing that needs to be said. The reader fills that in with their own perception, which is how we're ending up with the Torment Nexus, because some people think the Torment Nexus is cool.