So someone who isn't an expert in implementing financial services isn't allowed entry into a discussion about LLMs in software develoment? Weird gate to keep, but sure.
I could see "well this doesn't apply to the financial space" as an argument, though I wouldn't really buy that in this case. But "fuck off you don't have the specific domain knowledge of this other dude" is a weird bar to set.
I was about to ask if you saw evidence of Claude being used, but yeah, the README reeks of it. I'd be cautious about using this for anything real without doing some good testing and code reviewing ahead of time, and at that point, I'd rather just use something else.
You can't solve people problems without people. It doesn't matter how fancy your calculator is, whether it can only do addition or it's capable of simulating the universe. Someone has to take the blame (and accept the credit).
There is one other thing not mentioned that LLMs are bad at: being accountable. When your customers come complaining at 2:30 in the morning that the payments are failing, your manager isn't going to the LLM to ask what the fuck broke and why the fuck he's awake after 3 hours of sleep. He's going to you to do that. And when you're able to tell him that your downstream service is having an outage because AWS shit the bed again, he's going to trust your word. Will he choose to replace you with a LLM? Maybe, but he'll never be able to put out those fires without you.
Anytime a game goes fullscreen, it would mess up my desktop. Sometimes the screen would just be stuck black or the display resolution wouldn't revert properly with fullscreen. Heck, fullscreen was so broken that I avoided it as much as possible. Borderless windowed was the way to go, where it was available anyway (which is most newer games but more rare as you look at older titles).
Actually, for fun, one of my friends was trying to install an old game from the era in a Windows 98 emulator to play it again because he couldn't get it to boot on 11. He spent hours and ran into so many issues, eventually giving up because it had no audio, wouldn't boot, etc. For fun, I tried the game's installer on Manjaro (through Wine) and it installed and booted with minimal issues on the first try.
Where you'll have an easier time on Windows is pretty much exclusively with games that are hardcoded to only work on Windows, whether because of an anticheat or because of some kind of DRM. I don't play any titles like that, and every game I've run on Linux Just Works™. I'd probably just boot into Windows for those titles if I played them, but otherwise, the experience on Linux is just so much better.
Well I don't use this extension, no do I plan to. That aside, anyone can fork this repo and maintain it themselves. It feels like a stretch to say this isn't a benefit to society when anyone can use it and fork it without limitations or payment.
The rest of what you're saying is inapplicable here, but is applicable to other stuff they do. EEE is usually when they buy a product or service (Skype, for example) and kill it off (which was possible because Skype was a closed source service). You can't really EEE an open source project. Even vscode has popular forks, and there's nothing MS can do to stop them (outside frivilous lawsuits I guess).
I don't like them either, but I do think it's important to differentiate things that companies (and people) do that benefit others from things that harm them. This contribution to open source stands in contrast to all the shit they've done recently and over time with Windows, AI, and so on.
I'm glad this covers UUIDv7. Unless you need cryptographically-random, unpredictable row IDs, using UUIDv7 helps a lot with the performance by making the keys ordered at least.
Am I missing something here? It's an open source Postgres extension with a permissive license. Azure has had hosted Postgres databases for years, as have all the other major cloud providers. I'd be concerned if they were ecosystem locking the extension, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
The motivation for this extension, hilariously, is likely to run AI. With how long requests can take due to inference, durable execution is useful to avoid losing data mid-request and needing to restart the whole thing. This seems useful outside of that though, for other kinds of long-running requests.
They are not unit tests, they are integration tests. Which in my experience makes unit-testing frameworks like pytest a poor fit. I've also had to write my own framework, for that reason, despite preferring pytest for unit-testing.
Depends on the project of course, but you can absolutely write integration tests with pytest. In my experience, it's easy to @pytest.mark.integration the integration tests, then pass -m to the CLI to filter between integration and non-integration tests. You can load the environment-specific stuff in fixtures that are only used by those tests as well, and do setup/teardown with fixtures of course as needed.
In one year, we'll all be waiting for your own custom kernel and OS. We definitely need more competition in the space.
They really should use some time exploring how they can use AI to steer society in a less harmful direction where rich psychopaths can't set the direction for everyone else
The current AI hype train is exactly what steers society in the direction opposite of what you seem to want. It gives companies an excuse to fire people without taking accountability, and it gives employers an excuse to try to cut wages.
If it were as powerful as you seem to be implying, it would make software devs some of the most valuable workers on the planet. One dev would be capable of doing what entire teams were capable of before. Everyone would want to hire all the devs on the planet and churn out software at an accelerating pace to try to overtake all their competitors. Do you feel that software devs are, in fact, that valuable? Because I just see people getting fired, pay being cut, and workloads increasing to abusive levels.
The differences between a human brain and any kind of model we can currently train are too great to be listed. They are incomparable. It turns out that no matter how many perceptrons you put together, you don't get a brain.
Heck, we don't even know how brains work, and you got people talking about how they're making AI clones of themselves with LLMs lol.
I'm on Manjaro, and it actually does have two places for settings. The KDE settings menu is usually the place to go, but Manjaro's settings menu is where you can do a few obscure things like installing different kernel versions.
This might just be a Manjaro thing though as I haven't seen this on other distros, and Control Panel does way more than it should really on Windows with how long the Settings app has been around.
Actual programmers using it as a proper tool should produce output indistinguishable from actual programmers not using it at all. That there even is (often) a visible distinction is a big part of the problem.
Notably, it even explicitly says in the proposal that it shouldn't require any policing. Instead, obvious cases are more important.
Over confident devs who can't figure out the delta between entire companies replacing humans
They're firing humans. "Replacing" implies something else is doing their jobs.
a force amplifier that'll turn devs into architecture/operators outside a small niche of actual hardcore coders.
Is this "force amplifier" in the room with us right now?
Year of the Linux desktop any day now.
"Year of the Linux desktop" is a meme. Nobody cares if someone uses Linux, Mac, or Windows. All anyone wants is decent support for software on Linux as well. That being the case, it takes a special kind of masochism to use Windows these days.
I'm worried about this creating a bunch of confusion in the future, but hopefully at some point they mark the old ranges as deprecated.
Ranges directly being iterators confused me so much at first because no other standard iterable types really work that way, then combined with them being !Copy they just felt wrong. The new ranges look so much easier to use and understand.
So someone who isn't an expert in implementing financial services isn't allowed entry into a discussion about LLMs in software develoment? Weird gate to keep, but sure.
I could see "well this doesn't apply to the financial space" as an argument, though I wouldn't really buy that in this case. But "fuck off you don't have the specific domain knowledge of this other dude" is a weird bar to set.