jonmoore

This appears to be ai-generated based on my impression, pangram's "100% of this text is ai", and the blog's posting history.

Yes, utter slop. Hacker News could do with support for flagging and ignoring such submissions.

Not “instead of” but “in addition to”. Government regulation is not perfect but is the first-best solution to imposing such injunctions, and prima facie is much more effective than social norms or industry self-regulation. That’s a major part of why the industry bodies are objecting to it.

This would be much more convincing if the repos, issue trackers, etc. were accessible.

Life on Earth was hugely ambitious in ideas too, covering the whole history of life, with evolution as an underpinning theory throughout. As a child, it had much more impact on me than anything else on TV, and I still remember a lot of scenes.

I really liked the evaluation method here - testing fidelity by round-tripping through chains of invertible steps. It was striking how even frontier models accumulated errors on seemingly computer-friendly tasks.

It would be interesting to know if the stronger results on Python are not just an artefact of the Python-specific evaluation, if they carry over to other common general-purpose languages, and if they are driven by something specific in the training processes.

Indeed. This is just a vibe-coded addition to an already overcrowded space, with no indication of any intent to consult others or support it for real use.

I asked the same question to one of the core devs at a recent event and he (1) said that some people in finance have done related things and (2) suggested using the Ray slack to connect with developers and power users who might have helpful advice.

I agree this is a very interesting area to consider Ray for. There are lots of projects/products that provide core components that could be used but there’s no widely used library. It feels like one is overdue.

I also like Racket for a good few of these reasons, but the tooling has a lot of sharp edges and limitations in practice. It would be unfair to expect a full JetBrains/Microsoft IDE experience but it surprised me that a Lisp descendant would come with such an underpowered default REPL. I also find, whatever the technical merits of Scribble compared to docstrings and Markdown, that the documentation for most Racket packages is poorly written compared to that for even minor packages in common languages.

Thanks. This focuses on the most common daily need, with really clean design and display of information, and live updates as a flourish. Definitely sparks joy.

I can be pretty cynical about corporate politics but that kind of consultant-IC interview is almost always safe. It’s wildly against the consultant’s interests to cause serious conflict to break out and it’s easy to tone down inflammatory comments. Also, if the IC’s ideas are ones likely to rile up management the consultant is going to drop them. There are also potential upsides; if senior management is decent they will be glad that their employees have good suggestions and a good fraction of consultants will be glad to credit the ICs once management have bought in; ofc some will take all the credit themselves but that’s still a low-downside proposition.

Indeed, and tools like dep-tree provide a combination of 1) making module structure visible 2) making rules about this structure concrete and 3) automatically checking for rule violations.

These all help to lower the cognitive barrier to learning and maintaining the code base effectively. For developers new to the code base they help with learning and for those more experienced they help with ongoing design and maintenance.

Most long-lived code bases I've seen have adopted or built such tooling at some point, often with tools customized to the code base. For example in one large code base (c. 250 devs) we built tooling that simulated and helped optimize the changes to implement a major refactor of the overall module structure.