xnorswap
I'm genuinely struggling to understand how slack is much different now than 5 or more years ago. There's a handful of features that are easy to ignore, but the fundamental experience has barely changed in a decade.
What is it about slack that you despise?
Even Alyx is 6 years old, if that's your best example of an innovative AAA game, you're already in trouble.
That it was such a success and led to an incredibly successful franchise despite that, shows the power of its writing and strong characters and world-building.
A similar thing goes for another legendary series: Assassin's Creed. The first game is borderline unplayable, but it was still enough of a success to spawn AC2 which was a masterpiece of storytelling, although the fundamental mechanics weren't really smooth yet even at that point, and improvements were made all the way through brotherhood to AC3 and then black flag.
Over time, the story-telling and characters weakened, although there were some gems along the way such as odyssey.
3 days ago: https://github.com/eggert/tz/commit/5b5b39dae16f787740b8c0d4...
It's not even the latest change to the library!
Finally, some much needed progress towards Sagan's apple pie.
The locomotive being exhibited in 1915 was a historic exhibition, exhibiting their first locomotive, which itself was actually from 1863.
It was a history piece. It was not demonstrating new technology!
It would be like saying that the first shuttle orbiter, Enterprise, was first exhibited in New York in 2012, inspiring crowds.
It's a pedantically true statement ( it was moved to NY in 2012 ), but it doesn't actually tell you about the state of technology in 2012.
Reality turns out to be more interesting, it was an exhibit of Southern Pacific's first steam locomotive, the CP Huntington, built in 1863.
So while it's true to say that the 1915 worlds' fair exhibited Southern Pacific's first steam locomotive, it's also very misleading to suggest it was new technology of the time.
https://aresluna.org/the-hardest-working-font-in-manhattan/
Discussed https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49201953 .
A long read but well worth it.
I trust ( although some don't ), Anthropic not to be doing that. I don't trust intermediate providers so much. If you're self-hosting then at least you know exactly what is running and get privacy on top.
Likewise you lose privacy of local hosting, and if it emerged that a provider was training on data they shouldn't be, would you have the necessary legal recourse, that you would going direct to the major model providers?
I'd like to hear more about your issue with the JIT and where do you find it a hindrance?
I've had a few benchmarks lately that performed better under JIT than AOT compilation, and while that isn't always the case, the JIT, especially on dotnet 10, performs very well.
Propriety models are clearly subsidised by enterprise API contracts, so it makes sense to milk that for all its worth, provided one steers clear of any lock in so the option to switch is always there.
Jumping to spending time managing and self-hosting open models is a nice ideal but I think it's a distraction to jump on that train without proven benefits given the value that other plans deliver.
I don't mean I'm against the idea of open models, they were especially instrumental in Anthropic backing down from the "Fable only initially available 2 weeks" plan, which got extended up until Fable was over-taken by Opus in general usefulness.
It's my view that any company sized appropriately for Teams plan should be milking it for all its worth while it still exists, and it is a waste to lose that opportunity by jumping on open models too early.
If you're a larger enterprise then it would be a very different story, you'd already be paying more forced onto API pricing and would likely have the capacity to have a team look at open models without impacting delivery.
What matters more for comparing what you get out of languages is the output of idiomatic code written against typical frameworks.
Indeed, it's still cool to see, even if it's optimised to beyond recognition, as seeing the occasional C# win is nice to keep the "re-write in rust" wolves from the door, who seem to ever lurk, especially in a world where re-writes appear easier.
I'm not that hot on the idea of open models, but having something dangled in front of you but suddenly unable to verify is not a good feeling.
With the right amount of coaxing you can sometimes get it to reproduce a PoC with a "TDD first" approach to fixing, but often now that gets blocked too.
It's rare to even see a "real" gif rather than webm or other optimised format, I don't know if that choice is part of the commentary or not.
This is my biggest problem with opus 5.5.
It's absolutely incredible in many ways, but it has no sense of "good enough".
It will go around in circles polishing something so to resolve edge-cases on edge-cases.
"Someone could create a class that calls your public method in such a way, that under 3 other race-condition properties, there might be stale data read".
It has no sense that it isn't appropriate to add a half dozen classes just to close that kind of hole, especially when there isn't even such a caller or possible conditions at present.
In fact the opposite happens here, you end up with instructions like "Take ten", each of which has to be individually popped out of a blister pack.
> Dentist comes in. She’s an attractive blond that paid for about 50% of her looks.
The automatic assumption that a blonde woman is hired or is successful because of looks is grossly and deeply sexist. If he thinks that isn't disrespectful then that's a big problem.
You may be surprised to learn there's a sphere in which "backups" are merely a tickbox exercise, something set up once, crudely, to be able to put on a form that you have back-ups.
They often lie dormant, untested, and drift from being fit for purpose. This often isn't discovered until it's too late.
That should be everybody!
There are standard practices for delegating responsibility, never ever be pasting API keys into websites.
Make Github Actions a paid-tier exclusive and this problem goes away.
GitHub are too scared to do that after the backlash around charging people for their own runners, but this would be a very different thing, simply stop giving free actions to people who have never paid them a penny.