jappgar

8 ms·

121.
by jappgar 9mo ago
It's funny that people blame the site for this. That toxicity is just part of software engineering culture. It's everywhere.
122.
by jappgar 9mo ago
Real security systems don't publicize how they work. This is just grandstanding. Half the people from this lab will go on to work for AI companies.
123.
by jappgar 9mo ago
And now you know the only reason these labs get any funding. It's all to benefit industry, whether the academics realize it or not.
124.
by jappgar 9mo ago
In an arms race, the party with the most money always wins.
125.
by jappgar 10mo ago
I generally agree with you but AI confusion is also a good signal your abstractions are nonsense. One problem there is that people would rather believe the AI is "dumb" than face the facts.
126.
by jappgar 10mo ago
There's really no such thing as complete verification. The quest for purity is some fountain of youth nonsense that distracts a lot of otherwise brilliant engineers. Ask the AI to make a program that consumes a program and determine if
127.
by jappgar 10mo ago
It is definitely harder to refactor Haskell than it is Typescript. Both are "safe" but one is slightly safer, and much harder to work with.
128.
by jappgar 10mo ago
If you're familiar with VSCode it's quite handy. If you hate VSCode for some reason then just don't use it.
129.
by jappgar 10mo ago
Why does ever HN thread read like a churlish blogger review of the latest installment of <popular-scifi-franchise>? Github is great. It barely changes at all and yet it's still too much for this originalist crowd.
130.
by jappgar 10mo ago
Hint: Type the '.' key on any code page or PR.
131.
by jappgar 11mo ago
Now I remember why I stopped commenting here.
132.
by jappgar 11mo ago
It is a law. The law of entropy. Try as you might, you cannot fight entropy eternally, as mistakes in this fight will accumulate and overpower you. It's the natural process of aging we see in every lifeform. The way life continues on d
133.
by jappgar 11mo ago
If we all did it, it wouldn't work.
134.
by jappgar 11mo ago
Not only that, but the whimsical nature of the instruction will lead to a more whimsical conversation. The chat is a simulation, and if you act silly, the model will simulate an appropriate response.
135.
by jappgar 1y ago
> In such a society, people don't steal because thieves have been removed from society. You can trust others because they have proven through their life that they are trustworthy. This is a very "Star Trek" view of the fut
136.
by jappgar 1y ago
You opted-in by buying the product in the first place. People are buying these things out of fear anyways. I thought they'd be happy big brother is watching.
137.
by jappgar 1y ago
Shame on the idiots who place a webcam on their front doorstep too.
138.
by jappgar 1y ago
Anthropomorphizing LLMs is not going to help anyone. They're not "lying" to you. There's no intent to deceive. I really think that the people who have the hardest time adapting to AI tools are the ones that take everyth
139.
by jappgar 1y ago
is this solving a problem people actually have? other libraries like rxjs use .pipe(f,g,h) which works just fine.
140.
by jappgar 1y ago
It's the same conceit. People who love programming but hate software development believe what they're doing is "pure" because it's untainted by external influence. A pure function can still be badly written and full
141.
by jappgar 1y ago
I have to think they borrowed "pure" from haskell. It's such a stupid word to use in both cases. Purity is an illusion. Water looks pure even when it's tainted with lead. Purity isn't good. If you only drank pure wa
142.
by jappgar 1y ago
In python or typescript, the most popular languages in the world, it offers no runtime safety. Even in languages like Haskell, "safety" is an illusion. You might create a NumberGreaterThanFive type with smart constructors but that
143.
by jappgar 1y ago
I really think parse don't validate gives people a false sense of security (particularly false in dynamic languages like javascript and python). "Well, I already know this is a valid uuid, so I don't really need to worry abou
144.
by jappgar 1y ago
No one likes to hear it, but it comes down to prompting skill. People who are terrible at communicating and delegating complex tasks will be terrible at prompting. It's no secret that a lot of engineers are bad at this part of the job.
145.
by jappgar 1y ago
LLMs are language models. Meshes aren't language. Yes this can create python to create simple objects, but that's not how anyone actually creates beautiful 3d art. Just like no one is handwriting svg files to create vector art. LL
146.
by jappgar 1y ago
LLMs aren't suited to this, just like they aren't suited to generating images (different models do the hard work, even when you're using an LLM interface). I agree with the parent comment. This might be neat to learn the basi
147.
by jappgar 1y ago
Dry cracked skin is a lot worse for your health. The body is producing oils for a reason
148.
by jappgar 1y ago
The idea that aging office workers can learn to weld is even dumber than thinking aging welders can learn to code.
149.
by jappgar 1y ago
That was my optimistic take before I started working on a large Haskell code base. Aside from the obvious problem that there's not enough FP in the training corpus, it seems like terser languages don't work all that well with LLMs
150.
by jappgar 1y ago
(Async) Iterators are definitionally pull-based and not suitable for event (push) handling. They've also been around for years as another poster mentioned.

More ›