shane_b

I don’t know where people are getting such low numbers. I’ve been a developer for 10 years. I care a lot about optimizing my workflow.

When copilot was released, I’d say I got a 15% increase. When ChatGPT was released it was like 50% at least and I can’t imagine going back. I remember how slow it was now.

My advice would be to force yourself to leverage it more or something. I hate googling now. I’ll find a page, copy the entire thing into gpt4 and the file i’m using with the error message and i have to do nothing.

How are y’all using it?

the history of exercise is just living. not that long ago, just living required constant movement. in my own childhood i had to do a ton of labor that was just living, not a job.

this is very good library that i was a little nervous about at first but i used it to build a custom command line tool for my business and it’s helped so much. it’s also very easy to create fancy cli features that make it feel like a real application.

there’s a zero percent chance people will be laid off and be happy. same with seeing people be laid off. there is no right thing to say

CEOs have feelings…

they traded innocence for humility and tolerance

i like your idea of improving effectiveness

population level data of social media is vulnerable to abuse by gov. social media is a poor input and gov will exploit ambiguity to their benefit.

> I'd say very little good can come from this.

> if the concern is abuse

not my intent, OP. the comment i replied to suggested gov instead. i made a comment about gov

there was as much reason to assume what i meant as much as what you assumed

i don’t think building your own framework is a good idea. react still has plenty of possible patterns to decide between even after making the decision to use it. a team should have decided upon ways to do stuff even inside of a framework/technology/language.

the benefits of vanilla implementation fix the problems that come with lack of training. like not understanding the low level api

training means so many things but in general, if it’s not “how we do work here” then it’s lacking at most orgs i’ve seen

> Isn't this exactly the same as bringing in a new developer to work on your custom web app build that does everything differently to everyone else? he has to learn your strategies for routing, caching, state propagation, etc, and has no external resources to help him.

it does seem that way. i’d add that even with established technologies, a company should have a set way to do stuff that is trained internally. frameworks et al frequently have multiple strategies or you want to extend a framework primitive.

i assume this is sarcasm which is unhelpful.

the original claim was to trust no one. my comment was the government should also not be trusted.

people put on such a front on social i wouldn’t trust any analysis. especially not health related

if the concern is abuse, i wouldn’t give it to gov

these are interesting, thanks for sharing

i'm in favor of getting rid of weapons. if nuclear power is ubiquitous, i don't know how that would be possible though.

> I think it's a by-definition thing at this point, that if a nuclear war occurs it will be due to irrational actors. The only rational thing to do with nukes is not use them.

> There's no reason to think that's the end of the list.

i agree with both. my point is rational/irrational actor has nothing to do with it. i think retaliation would be irrational but many would make a case otherwise. a case could be made for initiating conflict as well if weighing against hypothetical lives saved. that's frequently how ww2 usage is justified.

> What nuclear power plants have not been built, due to fears of thermonuclear weapons?

fair point. while i agree there is a distinction between weapons and energy, i think the branding applies to both. also, if we didn't fear nukes in the wrong hands, every country would have the tech for energy. wikipedia says 32 countries have nuclear power plants. i understand our fear, but i'd say it's also why nuclear power isn't ubiquitous.

> Well, because there's been nothing to sample in the extremely short time-span of 80 years!

absolutely. very short time. there were ample opportunities to use nukes in warfare even in that short time. my comments were focusing on the fact we use hypotheticals of irrational actors when the only evidence we have is counter. there's no telling what happens going forward.