xvinci

It does not have a license so it cannot be used though.

Not my observation. If you never look at the code and dont have basic guardrails in place (linters, architecture tests, some guidelines for best practices) - probably.

But as soon as you do minimal reviews and high-level corrections, applications turn out just fine.

Can there be bugs? Sure. That's the price of not reading or understanding every line. It should depend on the criticality of your software how much of these you tolerate and how much you don't (reviewing, understanding, testing everything 100% like you were used to if you had written it yourself will kill most if not all of your gained speed)

But I never got the impression of unmaintainability or unfixable bugs.

Actually the other side around: A really good cleanup pass, architectural changes, or bugfixes are seldom more than a few prompts and 2 hours away, provided your overall base is decent and you actually gave a fuck from the start.

Do you have a source for that? As to my knowledge advanced systems (such as lights on the twy directing you) are only present at very few airports. Recent incidents even happened due to RWY incursion without a ground controller noticing under bad visibility. So we are at a level where your runway is not even protected accordingly, let alone your 50+ taxiways.

Thats the kollsman window and as far as i am concerned is pretty common also in modern avionics?

I think it brings forward all the low-performers and people who think they are smarter than they really are. In the past, many would just have stayed silent unless they recently read an article or saw something on the news by chance. Now, you will get a myriad of ideas and plans with fatal flaws and a 100% score on LLM checkers :)

It's great and I'm never going back as long as it stays great. But I have one complaint: Maps. I have no solution to offer, but google maps is so damn good, the maps in Kagi which appear when clicking certain results (e.g. looking for a doctor) are almost unusable for me (slow, outdated).

You are right, BUT: Those denials have to follow contractual terms. I know a local (Europe) real world example where a friend of a friend (insurance company area manager) literally was told "this is your sum of money on claims that you can accept in this quarter, it cannot go above that". Which either you get lucky and make the quota, or you screw people over and hope they don't sue. And since we live in a world where the company wants "a little more" each year, well.. I don't see how this ends well.

The same problem does not apply to our social services (including health insurance) as they dont have to make profits at all costs.

Fully ack. But this can actually be turned into something good imho: I try to challenge all layers (Analysis, UI / UX design) on simplicity: "Do we really need X parts of the page all be affected / updated by something? How could we design it differently with locality in mind? Can we simplify the state somehow?" -> I think that the resulting solutions are often simpler, cheaper, and work just as well.

I dont intend it to be an all-in, but I do believe it could do the job in 50% or more cases just as well as any SPA framework. A lot we do is "just crudl" with some sprinkles on top.

A large chunk of our business comes from Spring Boot, so we are experimenting with JTE - looks decent so far (Thymeleaf feels just old nowadays).

My sell is pretty simple: You have regulations coming up in europe which will require you to keep applications up-to date and secure. Extending your SBOM by 1k NPM libraries is a huge cost. I want to get rid of that.

I am still trying to get HTMX adopted in a ~ 800 employee software development company. And while we do not yet have a project using HTMX in production, I like to use it a lot in thought experiments with mentees: Could you do it with HTMX / Fragments? If yes, how would you design it? Do we REALLY need an SPA?

Kudos to the developers.

> One of Haskell’s most basic innovations (well, I’d guess it probably wasn’t first, but compared to other relatively mainstream languages) was the ability to write the type of a function separately from writing the function body.

Anyone familiar with the initial versions of C / C++? Both languages have offerd the ability to define your function signatures in header files for as long as I have known them, so if you wished to separate from the actual function body you should have been able to do that.

But then Haskell can hardly have been the first mainstream? But maybe someone with more ancient knowledge could share some insights - thx.

Incorrect w&b can affect a lot of things. From longer ground roll during landing, to wrong brake settings, to worse handling of the aircraft and increased stall speeds. Under normal circumstances it should not be a problem due to huge safety margins, but if other things go wrong it starts adding up. One more hole in the swiss cheese model.

That's a very naive take imho. As far as I am aware your default DNS server on widnows is obtained via DHCP, meaning for most people it is chosen by the hardware provided by your ISP. Most people would include working DNS resolution to their "I bought internet access from you", even though they might not know about DNS and you are tecnically right. But I bet even judges would see it that way.