Why? That is a great use for AI. I'm guessing you are imagining that people are just blindly asking for unit tests and not even reading the results? Obviously don't do that.
I don't think that's true. In fact most people say the opposite - AI doesn't help junior devs because they can't recognise when it's bullshitting. I don't really believe that either - that's just ego talking. I expect it helps people of all experience levels fairly equally, but only with tasks that are relatively simple. It's not like senior engineers never do those though.
It definitely is... But it's possible to be the most rigorous study and also not really prove anything. Proving this sort of stuff is ridiculously hard and expensive. We don't have proofs for even the most obvious things in programming, like that comments and good variable naming help comprehension. Sometimes studies even find the opposite.
Google tried to do that with Dart, and failed. In fairness Dart 1 was much worse than Dart 2... So maybe that was a good thing because there's no way they'd have been able to improve Dart as much as they have if it was part of the web.
Yeah... This doesn't sound promising. Refusing to acknowledge the obvious fact that AI and hostile mods have driven away 99% (not an exaggeration!) of their audience. A visual makeover before the change anything. Trying to sell the Q/A database for AI despite the fact that you can download it for free. They even talk up their job advertising product that they inexplicably cancelled a few years ago (btw I found levels.fyi has a pretty good job database if anyone is looking).
If it were me I would:
Use AI to improve question quality - if people post obviously bad questions get AI to improve it via a conversation.
Make it waaaaay harder to close questions. Like, require 10 votes and allow the asker to reopen it for free once.
Make it so questions can't go below 0 points.
Make it impossible to close as duplicate. You should be able to mark questions as possible duplicates (and the asker can say "yes it is") but if they don't it should stay open.
Maybe even make it impossible to close questions at all. What actual purpose does it solve apart from driving people away?
Apart from the AI that's all stuff they should have done 10 years ago.
Funny ethernet was the most common issue with Linux at a previous workplace. For some reason it would only get like 10 Mbps. Buggy driver presumably. I'm not sure they ever solved it (I had a Mac.)
We're talking about normal people here so they don't really have the option of debugging it either. They can only Google for other people's solutions or try resetting/rebooting everything. So although on Linux it's technically possible to fix any issue (e.g. on Windows leaving a playstation controller plugged in prevents sleep and there's nothing I can do to fix it), in practice on Linux there's nothing normal people can do to fix that sort of stuff either.
I know. Then they process those user agent strings to decide what OS it is. The question is why are they treating OSX and macOS as different OSes when they are the same? It was literally just a rebrand.
You shouldn’t be pulling an external project as a submodule, that’s just coupling yourself way way too tightly to external code.
You're no more tightly coupled than if you zip that repo up, and put it on an internal server. It's the exact same code you've just changed the distribution method.
And my whole point is that wouldn't be necessary if Git had a version of submodules that worked properly!
I work in RISC-V CPU development and I'd say 5-10 years is about right for when we'll see usable RISC-V desktop class machines.