Skip Navigation

User banner
Posts
13
Comments
1,985
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • To explain the clickbaity title: it means their product won't target professional coders, not that they won't hire them.

    Honestly, that makes sense, since anyone who knows a bit about Software development can see that handing off control of your app to a large language model in a way you have no clue of what's going on in the back is not sustainable at all.

    Customers could, in theory, use Claude directly to create software, but then they’d have to handle everything else that goes along with it. “What you’d have to do is pay for Claude, go to AWS to start an EC2 machine, go into that, install Git and Python. Already, most people are just gone at this point,” he said.

    so their competitive advantage is not having to start an ec2 instance lol

  • Same, my left hand hurts after hours of gameplay, so these days I consider it an accessibility feature and I'm legitimate disappointed when a game doesn't allow it.

    Remapping the shift action to caps lock too.

  • "Press F to pay respects"

    presses F *

    ticking sound starts

  • What happens next is up to me and my gut flora

  • the technical breakthrough of increasing shareholder value

  • work smarter 🧠

  • if you use the recursion hack, any machine can complete it in under a second. It complains about a "cow stack" or something, but who cares.

  • i knew i couldn't trust that cheese with a secret

  • I'm old

    Jump
  • hi sink, I'm dad. Come in

  • I don't https://xkcd.com/538/

    I'm convinced the chances of me losing access to the data are higher than encryption protecting it from a bad actor.

    Let's be real, full disk encryption won't protect a running system and if someone has physical access and really wants it, encryption won't protect you from the $5 wrench either.

    I do encrypt my phone data though, as someone running away with my phone is more realistic.

  • why are you geh

  • After tens of thousands of bash lines written, I have to disagree. The article seems to argue against use of -e due to unpredictable behavior; while that might be true, I've found having it in my scripts is more helpful than not.

    Bash is clunky. -euo pipefail is not a silver bullet but it does improve the reliability of most scripts. Expecting the writer to check the result of each command is both unrealistic and creates a lot of noise.

    When using this error handling pattern, most lines aren't even for handling them, they're just there to bubble it up to the caller. That is a distraction when reading a piece of code, and a nuisense when writing it.

    For the few times that I actually want to handle the error (not just pass it up), I'll do the "or" check. But if the script should just fail, -e will do just fine.

  • Getting a bit in between the lines, "should" more often than not reads to me as "it's expected to work and we're working towards it".

    While "could" sounds like a shrug: "it may work, but I/we have little to no control over it".

  • Fine. You WILL give me a 20% raise.