agent281

I understood their comment as going from

$100 / hour * 100 hours

to

$100 / hour * 500 hours

not to

$500 / hour * 100 hours

I appreciate this example. This does seem like a pretty difficult feature to build de novo. Did you already have some machine vision work integrated into your app? How are you handling machine vision? Is it just a call to an LLM API? Or are you doing it with a local model?

IMO, Haskell is less helpful for an LLM because of its advanced language features. The LLM is reasoning about the language textually. Since Haskell is very tense, the LLM would need a very strong model of how the language works.

I think languages with more minimal features and really good compile time errors would work well with LLMs. In particular, I've heard multiple people say how good LLMs are at generating Go.

Personally, I like languages with type inference so this wouldn't be my preference.

Fair enough!

Maybe? But it destabilized the Middle East, caused the migrant crisis in Europe, the migrant crisis caused a rise in right wing movements in Europe, it caused the rise of ISIS (lots of Iraqi ex-military), ISIS was involved in the the civil war in Syria, it caused a loss of faith in the American government, created a generation of disillusioned combat vets, so on and so forth.

I really think we're still recovering from the damage caused by Bush administration.

I agree with GP. I would amend their claim with "most problems* could be solved by building high density housing and services in areas with jobs." I.e., build real cities.

Building homes on federal land in the middle of no where will not do anything for people. We just need to allow people to build housing where there is a demand for labor.

Some things I think would be solved include:

- the housing crisis

- mobility => it would be easier for people to move to other parts of the country because they would be less tied to their homes - labor mismatches

- climate change => less reliance on cars

- funding infrastructure => more dense infrastructure means you don't have as much infrastructure to repair and you have more people paying for it

- city government budgets => high density areas are more tax efficient

- home insurance => the homes on the outskirts of cities are most likely to burn down; if housing is cheap the cost to insure it will be cheaper as well

IMO, if housing is 30-60% of peoples budgets and transportation is another 10-20%, if you can bring those costs down you can de-stress a lot of people. That might make politics less intense too.

* "Most problems" is not strictly accurate. But "more problems than you might think are directly related to housing" doesn't really roll off the tongue.

Yeah, I think we should keep that aspect of prop 13. That is what it was originally billed as.

It just doesn't make sense that golf courses pay taxes that are more aligned with the 70's property values.

If there was ever a major change to prop 13 taxes, I think we would need to phase in the new taxes over a five to ten year period. Otherwise, the market would be thrown into chaos.

You would need to overturn the proposition directly. The state Congress can't overturn it so you would need another proposition. That's a "simple" majority vote, but it's the third rail of California politics. We almost got it removed for businesses, but COVID happened and people were not in the mood for raising taxes.

I would not describe LA to SF as a consistent experience. I had an 8:30 PM flight delayed until 1:30 AM. Actually, the only consistency I've had with those flights is that they are consistently delayed.

I've heard that the flight delays cascade throughout the day. So if the first flight is 10 minutes delayed, all SF-LA flights are delayed for the rest of the day. Since SFO has a lot of fog, my understanding is that it's often delayed.

Maybe it's okay coming from Burbank, but I live on the Westside so I have to take LAX.

I would love to have another option. Ideally, a train would decrease the load on the airlines so that they could handle delays better.

To answer your question directly, no I don't have to do work trips every couple of days, but I do have work trips from LA to SF every couple of months.

I live in America. I have all my life. I've ridden on nice trains in Europe and Japan. The culture in the last 80-100 years has revolved around cars, but before that relied heavily on trains.

I much prefer riding a spacious train to riding in a cramped airplane. I like to be able to get up and walk around while the train is traveling. I prefer the minimal security processes on a train to an airplane.

Driving 6-10 hours is pretty miserable. I would much rather take a train or fly unless there are specific reasons why I need to drive.

It may be like comparing apples and oranges, but some people prefer apples. The good thing is that you can still eat oranges if you like.

California can't raise property taxes unless Prop 13 is repealed and that's a very high bar to pass.

Porque no los dos?

Last time I checked (2020) there were already a few rejected proposals to shorten the syntax for this. It seemed like they were pretty exasperated by them at the time.

Isn't it being a method call not quite equivalent? Are you able to define the method over arbitrary data types?

In Elixir, it is just a macro so it applies to all functions. I'm only a Scala novice so I'm not sure how it would work there.