tankenmate

Indeed, the OP's point seems very focused on programmers enjoying programming. And that's a perfectly laudable goal, but obviously this then means that the goal is programmer enjoyment, satisfaction, etc. If the goal is code that allows the user to benefit while also being correct and secure, then that drastically changes the economics and hence potential solutions of what parts of the work should be done by a LLM agent and what parts of the work should be done by a human agent. Economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources to satisfy human wants; so what you want from code determines a great deal of how to get there with the greatest benefit and the least cost.

that's not really much of an argument, almost all reasonable libraries wrap the functionality.and if a provider doesn't want to support http3 then the library will fallback, and then the laggards should pay the slow tax.

The biggest slow down on MacOS compared to Linux is the default filesystem APFS (but hey HFS and HFS+ were also slow). But not just that, the Linux dirent cache is optimised to within an inch of its life (it's deliberately sized to match CPU cachelines among other optimisations). And one of the chunks of that slow down is upper / lower case checks (Mac filesystems be default treat upper and lower case as the same thing when it comes to matching a filename).

Because of that Linux works so much faster with small files, and text files are small compared to audio, video, etc.

I was never a huge fan of exceptions and their "come from" / "spooky behaviour at a distance" semantics, and now I see a group of other language features I never thought highly of all belong to a group of implementation / semantically similar behaviour.

"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire." -- Churchill

And `/dev/shm/` (which postgres uses by default on most Unix platforms)

Sure, but what if that "known good customer" proxied access to someone else?

"means your benchmark is inaccurate by my book.", and like The Dude says "Yeah? Well, you know, that's just like uh, your opinion, man."

Create your own benchmark, and you can say it is a subset of "U.S. large-cap equities" and "best single gauge of U.S. large-cap equities" and let the market decide who does a better job.

Sure, but then it comes down to your opinion vs the S&P board's opinion. I suspect (given that there's only been a few days of this getting into the public eye) that more people support the S&P's position vs their critics. But the trade flows will show if people get out of SPX (or SPY/VOO) in the coming days.

"The inclusion criteria prioritizes companies that extract their cashflow into profit", in almost all cases, yes. But if you want to buy into these newer stocks there are various high growth indices you can buy, no one is stopping you. If you want to buy into only one or two of those stocks then you can. It's a free market for stocks and it's a free market for indices. There's no regulation that says the S&P has to include certain stocks.

"The S&P rules exist so the index can accurately reflect the market", the rules exist to reflect a subset of the market, and the committee chooses that subset. It's their subset so they get to set the rules, you don't have to use it if you don't want to. If you don't like that subset then create your own index. Then you just need to convince others to use it.

"Because the index needs accuracy.", and I would argue that include price accuracy not just inclusion accuracy. The S&P is a benchmark that is designed to reflect a subset of the market, and giving only some companies early access to the benchmark changes the benchmark. So if you want a benchmark that's designed to include all the big stocks regardless of age, profitability, etc then go make a new benchmark. The only thing you need to do is convince others to use your benchmark.

Brings back memories of desk checking

From my perspective it is a synthesis of "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." and "but npm is the source of all the shiny shiny!".

TENEX and TOPS-20 would be nice