jaggederest

I operate on a "no known bugs" basis with quite a bit of effort invested to try to find new, unknown bugs.

The idea that every crash isn't acted on is kind of a crazy one, to me. Not every crash is actually actionable in e.g. a mobile app, but every one should at least get an eyeball in my opinion.

This, to me anyway, is the bare minimum of "caring about software quality". If you do this regularly you'll have very solid code, and it's interesting that I have the perception at least that Guild Wars was a quality product.

There's another layer, where you do that for subthreshold issues like UI inconvenience, etc, but that's bonus, I think.

Speaking purely for myself, and there are other factors, but enormous money savings and I've lost a bunch of weight. I took the force majeur approach of moving outside of delivery app range.

Have you used chatgpt via web lately? They don't even show model names. It's a non-issue for any general public usage.

For posterity, in case someone else might be helped, guanfacine is my primary suspect.

I'll go even further, I started taking a medication for an unrelated cause (should not affect sleep/wake) and I now wake up bolt awake at 7:30am every day whether I like it or not. Historically I was someone who struggled with being awake before 10am. I have no idea why the shift happened, it's very confusing, but it was like a bolt of lightning reset my sleep schedule almost overnight.

This defeats a few hypotheses that were widely relied on.

strong exponential time hypothesis, and the titular exponential time hypothesis

It's not saying that these problems are easy, but it does demonstrate that they are much easier than previously believed. A decade ago if a human had published this kind of thing, and importantly if it held up, they would be almost certainly a strong candidate for some sort of award(s).

But regular people are not the consumers of OpenAI's API - they consume "Chatgpt" and don't care about model nomenclature.

The primary users of any API are the designers and engineers of the applications that use it. How many laypeople know what Postgresql is? How many of the applications they use run on it?

This is one of the last bastions of semi-serious discussion on the internet, and it's full of incredibly high level engineering talent.

Where else would you go? I'm honestly scratching my head thinking of someplace that wouldn't run you out on a rail, but that would give serious feedback. Kernel mailing lists are out, maybe there's something like that which I can't remember off the top of my head, but...

Also, nomenclature is incredibly hard. There are only two hard problems in computer science: cache expiration and naming things.

It's funny because I am working on repos that only I see and use, and I tell it to open a PR automatically after running all the various checks, and 6.1-sol invariably fails to do so unless I explicitly tell it that it's ok to run the tests (remote ci from local worktree) because it won't "send the contents of the repo to a remote server without explicit permission", and then it also refuses to open a PR until I explicitly bless it. In AGENTS.md it says, verbatim, that both of those things are explicitly permitted, indeed, required, but hey...

A thousand characters, perhaps, and we can gently exclude whitespace in languages insensitive to it.

but they were all deceived... in the darkness of a key-signing ceremony, another cert was signed. One byte to rule them all, and in the darkness MITM them.

Profitable companies are often very, very poorly run. The best run companies, in an absolute sense, are ones that are extremely close to breakeven on margin and thus have to shave every penny - my prototype for this would be Costco, for example.

Companies in industries where you can print money (for a while...) usually haven't actually been put under any duress, so any fool can manage them and look like a genius. It's in hard times that you discover whether you're a good manager or not, when the decisions made in good times come home to roost.

LLMs, natively, are better at programming than nearly every professional software engineer, full stop. There are a lot of meta tasks (not programming, software engineering) that they are worse at, but the actual programming part, they've transcended human potential.

You have to treat them like an ignorant junior engineer in nearly every respect, but trying to match with them at programming per se is a fool's errand.

The reason to read the code is not because you can catch their errors in programming. It's because they may have missed the forest for the trees at the operational or strategic level, and so that you can learn from them to understand better. It's like trying to beat the engine in chess now.