quintushoratius

Generating code is not, and never was, a bottleneck to projects. Understanding the problem, designing a solution, organizing resources, testing, and customer buy-in and moving targets have always represented the real issues.

Now, with LLMs, we're supposed to be able to paper over some or all of these problems.

They're supposed to be able to understand and intuitively fill the assumptions present in vague requirements, then produce working applications. They're supposed to shrink the timelines from years and months to weeks and days. They're supposed to replace human expertise with a reliable service.

Why else would I hire an LLM service over a team of humans?

> Supposedly 70% of software projects failed even before AI.

Given the way LLMs are marketed, we should expect a vastly more favorable project success rate, not simply a close parity, and definitely not a decreased rate.

Even if we consider that the number of attempts will rise if development becomes faster, we're told to expect a greater number of projects should also succeed because they're easier. They're supposed to justify the higher costs.

It's reasonable to ask if that's the case.

> It's a job, not a relationship. It's best not to confuse the two.

A relationship is defined as two parties that interact.

It's not friends, it's not romantic, and it's definitely not family, but a job _is_ a relationship.

That said, GP is absolutely correct that you can fall into toxic relationships with your employer. Especially in the US where, realistically, we're forced to rely on our employer for too many things (e.g. healthcare coverage), employers can and do take advantage of the situation.

> A CEO will set the grand vision, long term goals, and direction for the company

I thought determining vision/goals/direction was the responsibility of the board. The Chief Executive Officer is supposed to execute the board's wishes.

Nope, it's not. From your own link:

> In 1991, scientists at Bell Labs published a paper demonstrating the possibility of using a wavelength of 13.8 nm for the so-called soft X-ray projection lithography.[4]

> To address the challenge of EUV lithography, researchers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and Sandia National Laboratories were funded in the 1990s to perform basic research into the technical obstacles. The results of this successful effort were disseminated via a public/private partnership Cooperative R&D Agreement (CRADA).[3]

Are you sure it's the caffeine and not another substance in coffee?

It's a mixed bag.

During pregnancy the mothers immune system is muted, which prevents "rejection" of the fetus.

However, in an almost "parting gift" fashion, the departing fetus actually leaves behind immune cells that can provide years of boosted immune activity.

As if presidential elections are the only elections, or even the only ones that matter.

What the prior commenter meant is that in some jurisdictions it's pointless to vote against one of the parties because they win so overwhelmingly.

For example, I live in Massachusetts. The legislature is 95% one party. There's no point in being in another party, you'll never get elected and your vote won't change the outcome. It sounds like a dream if it's "your" party but without inter-party tension there are a lot of shenanigans that go on.

Your municipal and state elections are, by a wide margin, the most consequential to your daily life. Congressional representatives have a moderate importance.

Who is elected president has the least impact to your daily life, and to the laws and politics of the country, of any person you ever vote for. It's actually tiny, even if some people would like you to think it's everything.

Two possibilities come to mind:

1. They're not properly licensed for other markets. Something equivalent to selling a radio transmitter in the US that's not registered with the FCC.

2. They price units outside of Asian markets much higher and don't want to allow/encourage arbitrage that they don't control.

This is definitely a case of "porqué no los dos" (or more).

The problem with giving people choices is that sometimes they make the wrong choice.

I don't think I'm overstating anything.

My wife and I have owned an EV since 2019. We also still have a couple of ICEs for me and my daughter. I'm not going to throw a car away just because.

I see the cost savings of an EV up close and personal. The only downside has been range for long trips, but 364 days of the year that's not a problem and for the remaining days my ICE does the job. When that car dies, I'll rent one when it's needed.

> In my experience the maintenance costs is usually more tyres, suspension, breaks, and other similar things that would equally need to be maintained on EVs.

You'll go through tires _slightly_ faster because the cars are heavier. With the exception of some standouts like Tesla's Cybertruck, which reportedly is only getting 6k miles on a set of tires, the wear rate is slightly higher. Low rolling resistance tires are slightly more expensive. Plan on whatever you're paying now plus 20% to cover the difference.

I've never had to change the suspension on any of my cars. I wouldn't even consider it in a maintenance list unless you live somewhere with truly shit roads, but the mileage and repair cost would be the same in EV or ICE.

Brakes last forever in an EV. 100k miles easily.

Oil changes in the US cost $50+, and are done every 3-4k miles (or $75+, 7-10k miles if you choose synthetic oil).

Spark plugs are cheap, but paying someone to replace them is not.

Some EVs have liquid cooling, but it lasts longer than coolant in an ICE.

I'm so used to people around me driving automatics, I forget to consider a clutch - but I get >100k per clutch so it's not a frequent or predictable cost for me.

Most recent cars, even the small ones, seem to have swung back to using timing chains rather than belts, and don't need regular changes. You can consider it if you like, but you have to take it on a case-by-case basis.

Unless you don't keep your cars long enough to notice, your exhaust system will rust. Water is a byproduct of combustion, after all, and steam corrodes faster than liquid water. It's worse if you make lots of short trips - which is where an EV shines.

Also consider non-regularly-replaced things in your maintenance list: oxygen sensors, water pumps, thermostats, heater cores, etc. You can't predict when these things will fail, but over 10 years you'll almost certainly have to replace some of them.

Consider, also, downtime while your car is in the shop getting the work done.

Contrast to an EV: none of that. A new battery in 150k-200k miles for $5k, unless you're still satisfied with the reduced range.

Not every region of the continental US respects DST.

The real magic is not putting all the cells in one place. It's distributing them over the land mass.

A single solar power station can be taken out by a cloudy day.

A million little solar power stations spread across an continent average together into an even power source that provides power for longer than daylight hours.