sb8244

When I was testing my books' instructions, I would operate from a fresh state and only allow copy paste. Every single command and line of code had to be expressed and in the correct order.

This was generally really a good way to go about it, because it requires everything to be correct with no room for adjustment.

Still people would miss things, but it always came from skipping instructions (sometimes completely.) Maybe 10 support inquiries total.

Awareness and morality I suppose. Which generally doesn't matter in the capitalist AI race.

This breaks down because Tailwind is not monetized, is completely free, and hasn't indicated it won't be.

There is a corporate side with other features that has never been free. I pay for it because it's great.

I'm not sure if you're purposefully misstating it at this point or not. Several people have corrected you and you seem to double down incorrectly each time.

Writing with Pragmatic was such a great experience. Definitely a blessing that I was able to do that.

My experience with writing and royalties is just so different than this author's experiences.

It adds accountability, which is unfortunately something that ends up lacking in practice.

If you write bad code that creates a bug, I expect you to own it when possible. If you can't and the root cause is bad code, then we probably need to have a chat about that.

Of course the goal isn't to be a jerk. Lots of normal bugs make it through in reality. But if the root cause is true negligence, then there's a problem there.

AI makes negligence much easier to achieve.

Pragmatic has an inhouse book compiler. Most authors write in markdown and there's some special XML features you can use as well for it. Of course code linking is a first class feature.

It's a pretty nice system, actually.

That's a strawman. It is not really related to the main point and I'm not sure of the point you're trying to make (maybe that tension exists?)

Obviously things take as long as they take. I've always been an educator of this back to the business leadership. In my experience, most business people truly have no freaking clue how a product gets built and code gets shipped.

Giving proactive updates (meaning not the day it was expected to be done according to last update) are important part of a professionals working life. There's always a tension between business and engineers. Engineers just generally don't do that well with tension and try to minimize it, or complain about it.

If the bug affects 1 customer and the feature affects the rest, is the old feature complete?

It's not binary.

Are we reading the same article?

Also, you do realize that writing is taught in an incredibly formulaic way? I can't speak to English as second language authors, but I imagine it doesn't make it easier.

I read it just fine and everything made sense in it.

I would spend similar time debugging this if I were the author. It's a pretty serious bug, a non obvious issue, and would be impossible to connect to the ffi fix unless you already knew the problem.

The article makes it sound as if there were govt negotiations to have them sent home. It is light on details though, but with that many people of a friendly nation / corporation I imagine they get treated differently.

I interpreted that to mean they may not have permanent US immigration issues vs "being deported".

"if we build that feature, we'd have to own it."

"You're right, keep it on the 2028 roadmap"

That would be my experience in tech at least.

My understanding is that mnesia is sort of a relic. Really hard to work with and lots of edge / failure cases.

I'm not sure if it should be salvaged?

I made this for my high school chemistry project. We made it in the morning so it would be ready for our afternoon class.

It was drying in the chemistry back office and there must have been a draft. It exploded during a silent study hall.

Somehow they let us remake it for class that afternoon. We tried to put it on the floor as a joke, but our teacher was wearing sandals that day (no lab). She wasn't happy about it.

I originally got the idea (and prank idea) the previous year from a retiring chemistry teacher.

Maybe my position on this is obvious, I honestly don't know a lot of how others see it.

Preface: I'm generally an AI skeptic.

There are a LOT of people who are doing "business work" for a living, which is significantly different than hands-on coding. AI gives these people a way to just automate all of the (maybe necessary) work that they don't want to do.

The final product being 80% good enough is fine. It is done and doesn't require them to spend time on something they don't want to do.

More often than not, it is at 80% today.