skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We have a similar amount of IT experience, although I haven't been a daily engineer for a long time. I use aider.chat extensively for fun projects, preferring the Claude backend right now, and it definitely works. This site is 90% aider, give or take, the rest my hand edits: https://beta.personacollective.ai -- and it involves solidity, react, typescript and go.

Claude does benefit from some architectural direction. I think it's better at extending than creating from whole-cloth. My workflow looks like:

1) Rough out some code, say a smart contract with the key features

2) Tell claude to finish it and write extensive testing.

3) Run abigen on the solidity to get a go library

4) Tell claude to stub out golang server event handlers for every event in the go library

5) Create a react typescript site myself with a basic page

6) Tell claude to create an admin endpoint on the react site that pulls relevant data from the smart contracts into the react site.

6.5) Tell claude to redesign the site in a preferred style.

7) Go through and inspect the code for bugs. There will be a bunch.

8) For bugs that are simple, prompt Claude to fix: "You forgot x,y,z in these files. fix it."

9) For bugs that are a misunderstanding of my intent, either code up the core loop directly that's needed, or negotiate and explain. Coding is generally faster. Then say "I've fixed the code to work how it should, update X, Y, Z interfaces / etc."

10) for really difficult bugs or places I'm stumped, tar the codebase up, go to the chat interface of claude and gpto1-preview, paste the codebase in (claude can take a longer paste, but preview is better at holistic bugfixing), and explain the problem. Wait a minute or two and read the comments. 95% of the time one of the two LLMS is correct.

This all pretty much works. For these definitions of works:

1) It needs handholding to maintain a codebase's style and naming.

2) It can be overeager: "While I was in that file, I ..."

3) If it's more familiar with an old version of a library you will be constantly fighting it to use a new API.

How I would describe my experience: a year ago; it was like working with a junior dev that didn't know much and would constantly get things wrong. It is currently like working with a B+ senior-ish dev. It will still get things wrong, but things mostly compile, it can follow along, and it can generate new things to spec if those requests are reasonable.

All that to say, my coding projects went from "code with pair coder / puppy occasionally inserting helpful things" to "most of my time is spent at the architect level of the project, occasionally up to CTO, occasionally down to dev."

Is it worth it? If I had a day job writing mission critical code, I think I'd be verrry cautious right now, but if that job involved a lot of repetition and boiler plate / API integration, I would use it in a HEARTBEAT. It's so good at that stuff. For someone like me who is like "please extend my capacity and speed me up" it's amazing. I'd say I'm roughly 5-8x more productive. I love it.
Chromium uses web search for .internal TLD instead of opening URL
That's actually a solid question! You can probably ask GPT to AI-optimize a standard technical spec you have and to "ask clarifying questions in order to optimize for the best output". I've done that several times with past specs I've had and it was quite a fruitful process!
Not unlike me! The difference is it's incremental. I write one function, then write a test, and get it working. Then, building on that stable foundation I write another function, more tests, etc. Crapping out an entire pile of garbage at once is not the way.

I guess I'm holding it wrong? Is there a better way I could phrase my query?
Why say "ripped" when you can say "removed" and avoid bias in the subject/headline?
That only works with a web of independent and constant verification.

These days no one checks their sources, and whole networks of people make decision to benefit their views and wants, and not to disclose facts no matter the findings.
> it's not there yet

It's literally everywhere around me.

Coworkers, friends in other companies, business owner friends writing their first code, NGO friends using it to write grants.

I'm not sure where you are, but you appear to be isolated from the real world.
You don’t need co2 in the air to tell you to breathe. Your body makes co2, which is what you feel. Once you run out of oxygen to make co2, you are already unconscious.

If you go into an area with no oxygen, you will pass out very quickly with little warning except being dizzy, but you will not fail to feel like you need to breathe.

It might be slightly more safe to enter into a room full of co2 than a room full of nitrogen, because you might be alerted by the high co2 a few seconds before the dizziness takes over, but that doesn’t make rebreathers dangerous because you will forget to breathe. If you run out of oxygen, you’re unconscious in a few seconds anyway, co2 or no co2.
> The ⊢ symbol has not changed; it means that the formula to which it applies is asserted to be true. ⊃ is logical implication, and ≡ is logical equivalence.

A strange thing happened to me in mathematics. When I got to the point where these symbols started showing up (ninth grade, more or less) I did not get a thorough explanation of the symbols; they just appeared and I tried to intuit what they meant. As more symbols crept into my math, I tried to ignore them where possible. Eventually this meant that I could not continue learning math, as it became mostly all such symbols.

I got as far as a minor in math. I'm not sure how any of this this happened, but I wish I had a table of these symbols in ninth grade.
I'd actually love to see a benchmark on this - we're just speculating now.
Are you serious about "thousands a month"? I don't mean to be hostile, I'm just truly surprised -- if the bar were that low (not that these apps aren't impressive, but most engineers write useful apps from time to time) I would expect the market to be rather packed
My daily driver is a 25 year old Porsche sports car and it has less fuel range than a new Taycan. Porsche has always sold track ready cars from the factory- with all of the compromises that entails. The Taycan is a much better designed and made car than a Model S. Porsche also is a company that doesn’t exaggerate their specs like Tesla does- a quick google search suggests the real world range of the Taycan is actually higher than the Model S despite a massive difference in the specs.

I’ve also heard Kias EVs are great cars.
>How do you reconcile his "bullshit" with the fact his spaceships are saving astronauts from space?

this reminds me of a common political tactic. "Mr. SoandSo couldn't be lying, look at his donation records and philanthropy! Look at the jobs he produced! The profit he has generated!"

Well, the matter-of-fact is that there is no need to reconcile the two states. He's a highly effective individual who has had great success in certain fields -- he's also a huckster con-man that over-promises and under-sells.

One could argue that his effectiveness on one sided is aided by his willing to take ethical shortcuts with his portrayed opinions and 'honesty' on the other side.

There are no pure shades of color in the human psyche.

I think fans of his would just call it '4D chess' and refer to his genius. Whatever floats your boat.

Taking your idea into straight non-sense : how many days does this space mission add to our expectation on FSD delivery? Are there grounds for a class-action lawsuit against Boeing originating from Tesla owners that are unhappy with the additional stress to the time-line? Sounds ridiculous from the other side...
This option still appears for me (and works) on iOS 18.1 RC on my phone. Probably a bug?
Forcing both companies to have the same features reduces customer choice in the overall market. Some people want to choose the simple curated experience and the EU and others backing their decisions are removing that option from the market. iOS has already become significantly more complex over the years and this keeps dialing up the complexity and areas where a user can get tripped up.

The support calls I’ve received from family since they all moved to Apple have dropped dramatically. It may not be the platform for you, but it’s the platform a lot of people prefer. This is because of the curation, not in spite of it. Infinite choice and control means an infinite potential for problems. A lot of people don’t want that. If they did, desktop Linux would be mainstream instead of a meme.

I like that open platforms exist, but I also like that other platforms exist that don’t require much effort. Rarely do those things exist in a single package. I don’t know why people, who I only assume don’t use Apple products, feel the need to change them and take away what people like.

Not being able to delete literally everything doesn’t seem like that big of a deal. Especially when those apps are ones a significant number of other applications assume exist and try to interact with. Where is the line? Or is there no line? Will people try to compel Apple to keep removing stuff until iOS boots up to a prompt where the user can net boot the OS of their choice?
You should try SkyMass. You can put up a web ui in as few as 10 loc. and something actually useful in around 50.

Contact me if you need some help getting going…
* Who's "we"?

* Was it?

* Remember when the mouse was a niche invention at PARC?
In 18.0.1 the audiogram setup isn't on that screen, it's through the "Custom Audio Setup" button. If you select that, then "Continue" you get to a screen that says "Add Audiogram". It's not in the red circled area, though that may have been where it was under previous versions of iOS.

EDIT: I added some (faked) audiogram data to the Health app just to see how that appeared. It also does not show up on that initial screen, you still have to select the "Custom Audio Setup" button and then you can select an audiogram stored in Health. This is not a change new to 18.1, though again maybe prior to 18 it appeared on that initial screen.
> How would one go about accomplishing a 'dumbing down' of a contract

Perhaps go with the UCC default and not try to have the buyer opt out of every specific consumer right.

The longer the contract, the more one party is probably being screwed with great specificity.
Another large client base for paper mills are doctors in countries where English is not a common language, and doctors are ranked based on publications rather than clinical work: they don't have time or training in research, their clinical work is in their native language, but promotions being entirely tied to publication count sets up a strong incentive to launder publications. Hospital admins aren't the most savvy about which articles in which journals are respectable, so they check boxes based on impact factor. The doctors write one paper themselves (to give seminars on) and pad their resume with a few papers nobody will ever ask questions about.
Cell tower IP data is likely useless.

However, your friends using your WiFi, or your coworkers and you using the work WiFi, provides a link.
I doubt that even the best case scenario of a society that gets wrapped up in chatting to bots would be great.
I want large companies to pay you too, but SSO is not a purely large company feature. There are plenty of companies with more than 10 developers that are not large companies.
Some Non-Contradictory Statements About Talent, School, and Meritocracy
This amazes me since I switched to go because its builds are so insanely fast and the module system is quite clean. Out of all the languages, go probably needs it the least!

I did use bazel long ago for c++ and it was quite good at it, but we didn’t have very many dependencies.
no devs should be using the chat ui. get api key via anthropic.com, add cline extension on VSCode and do away with copy/pasting
You know something about their internal architecture and why it was built that way and the tradeoffs involved, I guess?
Cybertruck became the 3rd best selling EV in the US after Model Y and 3. Looks like the people have spoken after looking at "literally almost any other EV in the last few years''.
That might have been your reaction but it wasn't the reaction of many hype-inclined analyst types. Tesla is particular has been promising "full self driving next year" for like a decade now.

And despite everything, Waymo is not quite there yet. It's able to handle certain areas at a limited scale. Amazing, yes, but it has not changed the reality of driving for 99.9% of the population. Soon it will, I'm sure, but not yet.
With which airpods/headphones though?
This is a blog post not a news article...
From their perspective what's the difference? It would be better if after rebasing all resulting commits were tested automatically, but even if they were not - the offending commit is still wrong "in context".
> Do not install commercial apps.

This advice is about as practical as "go live in a cave". At some point, you have to decide whether avoiding the privacy harm limits your ability to function, and sadly, that is increasingly the case.
Ground beef stimulates more protein synthesis than soy based meat
Numerological QA entertainment?
I'm guessing many of the engineers doing the AI/self driving stuff want to remain the bay area.
Lucky for us, the BBC isn't in the business of publishing articles on fictional situations.
It's worth a try. However, expect the brokers to claim that they cannot be sure that you're the only person using the phone and therefore, for privacy reasons, they can't share the data.

You can complain to the Irish DPA (because that's where the broker is likely hiding, pro-forma), which will respond within a year or two with a request for more information.

If the broker made the mistake to be domiciled in a location with a more competent DPA or you are willing to drag them to court, you might stand a better chance.
Article title: The anabolic response to a ground beef patty and soy-based meat alternative: a randomized controlled trial
o1 found a new feature I hadn't noticed became available and replaced some nasty regex code I had been working on for hours with 1 library call.

4o had been happy to attempt to help me fix my function, o1 just went "well that's interesting, meatbag, but have you considered reading the manual?"
The news coverage focusing on election law missed something. This "giveaway" is very like the contests Mr Beast runs to make himself look generous but they're really illegal lotteries. It is unsurprising that Elon would use the same sloppy approach. But the FTC might have more to say about Elon's thing than the FEC.
Is the ESP32 mainly to drive the LCD display and provide a numeric readout, or is it also needed to control the sensor-side so that it cycles through different settings and frequencies?
My point is that they are two very different products with substantially different target audiences.

Now, sure, you can say the Vision Pro was not as big a success as the iPad even if you account for that difference in markets, scale, price ranges, etc. But that doesn't mean it's a total failure either, or that there is no future for the product.

Most people who have a Vision Pro, seem to like it. It's unsurprising that it's not flying off the shelves because at the moment it's little else than an expensive toy, and once the novelty wears off it's not like there is that much to do with it at the moment, it's also seemingly uncomfortable to wear for prolonged periods of time. But like I said, it's not hard to see how it could be getting better with future iterations.

So even if there is no perfect correlation between the shortcomings of the first iPad and the larger shortcomings of the first Vision Pro, there is a correlation.
Sorting using generics is faster and more ergonomic. That's why they are adding generic based sort to the standard library.

https://pkg.go.dev/golang.org/x/exp/slices#Sort

Sort on its own is maybe not the best example because it's relatively easy to work around, but those workarounds quickly break down. Write me a function that returns the keys of a map in order without using generics...

I'm not exactly sure what your second point is.
This so much. Can wear the AVP for hours uninterrupted, but lasted 10 mins in Occulus 3 before getting queasy. Have given AVP demos to dozens of people, offering varying degrees of guidance and everyone just "gets it" after a couple minutes regardless. Eye and hand tracking UI is phenomenal and awesome.
> It’s unfortunate that art selects so strongly for skill.

Jackson Pollock begs to differ.
Yeah, that makes sense. But I wonder, going forward, what is the relationship between "building abstractions/libraries" vs "Using LLMs"?

For your example, "How do I accept a drag and dropped file in JS?" - An LLM can spit out 100 lines that does what you want, OR someone writes a nice library that does what you want in a single function call (say, for the common case. More complicated usage requires more arguments, etc.)

(Of course, another option is LLMs are the ones writing these library functions).

I guess I am one of those programmers who is allergic to boilerplate (for better or worse), so having LLMs split out lots of code bothers me.
There are a bunch of comments in this thread along the lines of "these are just toys" and "anyone could build these without an LLM".

I need to update my post to emphasize this, but that's kind of the point.

Every one of these 14 tools (with the possible exception of the OpenAI Audio debugger one, that one's quite hard) is something any web programmer could build relatively quickly.

... but not as quickly as I did with an LLM, because they almost all took less than 5 minutes from idea to finished implementation.

The key point is that if I didn't have Claude to help build these, I wouldn't have built them at all. None of them would justify even an hour of work - they weren't essential tools that I needed to get stuff done, they were just things I built because building them is now so cheap (in terms of time) that there was no reason not to.

That's the real magic here. The cost of knocking out a single page app that does something simple is often now lower than even the cost of spending a few minutes on Google trying to find an existing tool that solves the same problem.
I know this, but do you think all of these parts should need to be coded by hand? It's just a complete waste of time. That's what I meant by writing hacky and ugly code to achieve this.

Plus, in Next, there was no way to associate a token to a social login during the new login in the backend. The only way is to do it via a separate request in the frontend and then relogin the user.
If accidentally nuking a single node while debugging causes issues you have bigger problems. Especially if you are running kubernetes any node should be able to fall off the earth at any time without issues.

I agree that you should set a maximum lifetime for a node on the order of a few weeks.

I also agree that you shouldn’t be giving randos access to production infra, but and the end of the day there needs to be some people at the company who have the keys to the kingdom because you don’t know what you don’t know and you need to be able to deal with unexpected faults or outages of the telemetry and logging systems.

I once bootstrapped an entire datacenter with tens of thousands of nodes from an SSH terminal after an abrupt power failure. It turns out infrastructure has lots of circular dependencies and we had to manually break that dependency.
I think the problem you're describing might be a symptom of coding as the first step instead of the last. I find once I specify a problem and my proposed solution in sufficient detail, the structure of the code becomes obvious. This is best done with the various tools of human communication--visual diagrams, prose, mathematics, and algorithmic descriptions in the form of pseudocode. Only then, when I sufficiently understand what I'm actually trying to do, should I actually start writing code in a programming language. Otherwise I get pigeonholed into some half-baked idea by the various rigours of the language itself. Writing code before I truly understand what I'm trying to accomplish, I've learned over time, is an awfully costly form of premature optimization.

EDIT: I don't mean to suggest programming languages aren't tools of human communication--they absolutely are. In fact, that's their primary purpose--to communicate ideas about the structure of a computation to other programmers. But starting with structural ideas about the implementation rather than conceptual ones about the nature of the problem and the shape the solution should therefore take is putting the cart before the horse.
I agree with you. Go saves a lot of time by having an amazing standard library and tooling... but the tedious writing out of the loops man! I don't even mind `if err != nil` - that's just proper error handling, but writing out loops and maps by hand like a cave man... I can't go back to that.
We have never advanced to a real prioritized user interface.
Every user has priorities which can be detected by knowing Context.
Simplification as a key asset that Apple masters only makes sense if you adapt it to a users priorities.
What you need is a "git rebase" that records a second parent for each commit pointing to the original commit that is being rebased.

People who prefer git rebase workflow will hate the complicated history they see in "git log", but otherwise it will be the same.

Alternatively, the right way to use "git merge" is to merge every successive commit of a branch one by one.

The problem with "git merge" is that it collapses multiple commits into one giant patch bomb.

If one of the commits caused a problem, you don't have that commit isolated on the relevant stream (the trunk) where you are actually debugging the problem.

You know that the merge introduced a problem, and it seems that it was a particular commit there. But you don't have that commit by itself in the stream where you are working.

It can easily be that a commit which worked fine on a branch only becomes a problem in its merged form on the trunk, due to some way a conflict was resolved or whatever other coincidence or situation. Then, all you know is that the giant merge bomb caused a problem, but when you switch to the branch, the problem does not reproduce and thus cannot be traced to a commit.

If that commit is individually brought into the trunk, the breakage associated with it will be correctly attributed to it.

In both cases, the source material the same: the original version of the commit doesn't exhibit the problem on its original branch.

It is pretty important to merge the individual changes one by one, so that you are changing fewer things in one commit.

People like rebase because it does that one by one thing. Git rebase breaks the relationship by not recording the extra parents, but since they have the reworked version of each change on the stream they care about, they don't care about that. Plus they like the tidy linear history.
It's on my list.
You can do this with OBS.
I agree. I'd prefer using something like biodiesel in planes, but I'm not sure if there is a technical limitation.
Having used both AVP and occulus 3, the AVP is just way better user experience already, no need for them to copy an inferior product. Would expect usability delta to persist, (as well as the price delta.)
One element is buzzword inflation, and another is raising the bar.

On the one hand, entirely trusting Cloudflare isn't really zero trust.

On the other hand, not trusting any network is one narrow definition.

I'll give you SSH keys when you pry them from my cold, dead FDE SSDs.
NetGuard – rootless Android outbound per-app OSS firewall, like LittleSnitch