wbkang

This is equally as biased as those who claim AI can just code all night autonomously for you. You don't have to use it to generate "fully LLM-generated PRs". It's true GitHub is flooded with poor-quality LLM slop, but that is not the only way to use it.

It's ironic the author links to Naur's paper because I use LLMs to dig through code faster, question my assumptions, review my drafts, or generate drafts for my review. It's not because I am bad at it, I used to be very proud of being able to do this better than others. Anyway, this does not lead to more "lines of code" as the author suggests and instead it can lead to higher quality code.

FWIW, I also don't believe you can let LLMs make critical judgement by somehow stringing together more LLMs. And I am also not making a claim on whether the $1.5T investment is proportional to its benefits. But to say "industry has nothing to show for it", or to bring up strawmen like "LLM-generated PRs" and "lines of code", makes me question whether the author has tried studying the applications of LLMs.

It’s all relative. It’s cheap if you think about spinning up new processes to run one off commands. It gets very expensive when you have to spawn it hundreds of times per second, and it can waste cpu cycles that could be used for query processing instead.

This resonated with me a lot, thank you. It more or less matches what I have experienced, and it’s good to see someone write this down in a fairly balanced point of view.

My favourite parts:

> My job is to figure out the set of software approaches that match that estimate. […]

> Many engineers find this approach distasteful. […]

> If you refuse to estimate, you’re forcing someone less technical to estimate for you.

Even after many years, I still find it distasteful sometimes but I have to remind myself what everyone gets paid for at the end of the day.

I read your issue, and it's not so different from `sudo rm -rf /` as opposed to an actual design flaw.

This is from more than 25 years ago, there has been big changes since then.

It sounds like Stockholm to me ;) I don't think you _need_ the index to make partial commit work. I've used Mercurial first so I know "hg commit -i" exists.

Even if the staging concept is clear to someone, git cli terminology _is_ objectively very confusing and there are many articles written about it already (e.g., do I "add" to index? Is the index also referred as cached/Staged? Mixing different verbs and nouns everywhere). Are they all the same?)

I just wrote this to say it is not a necessary part of making a tool as powerful as git - Mercurial shows an example of a similar tool with a less confusing CLI.

Of course, git won so I just live with it. I enjoy teaching git new devs because once you explain the confusing terminology up front, they understand it faster.

Disabling swap on windows means all of your applications virtual memory has to fit in your physical memory. In Windows any unused virtual memory still needs space in RAM or, it has to have space in the page files.

Right now if I look at my Firefox processes, they take more (10-20%, sometimes a lot more) more commit size (virtual memory) than their private working set. With page files the unused virtual memory portion is simply reserved on the page file with minimal overhead. Without any page files, you will be just wasting memory.

RE: unnecessary writes, it might be windows proactively dumping the contents of the memory (I think this happens but I cannot confirm right now). But in general that's very low priority and it should affect your performance.

This is the correct answer that needs to be at the top. No swap doesn't mean OOM killer magically kicks in earlier. It just means the anonymous memory has no where to go and your executable pages get evicted and then you are really hosed.

I feel like the typical Google answer to this would just be to shut down your account D: fingers-crossed that it doesn't happen

Are there any open source printers? I know that 3d printers have many open source designs and they perform ok.

I don't have solid data but for "core" mature software written in c/c++ like browsers and Linux, I feel like I see far more high profile security bugs from the lack of memory safety rather than something like "Linux failed to enforce the existing permissions".

SMS OTP sucks but this isn't it. Receiving text abroad is free with almost all carriers including Rogers.

It's an unreliable and jarring experience, I had to give up on it. The app gives no indication when the synchronization would happen, and doesn't explain why when it does not work.

The vanilla interface often allows what's right depending on the context (e.g., if an unnamed return value is passed in, it can be move constructed, otherwise it can be copied). I saw some code bases provide an override for a const ref and a normal type.