DeWilde

My feeling is that people won't be writing code as it is written now. Those that do will likely be the same as horseshoe makers. Instead, you will have new tools and be solving different problems. As mechanics now have taken the role of those in charge of maintaining our primary transportation tool.

> we developpers are now modern days horseshoe makers.

Explain?

Maybe, but maybe not.

So far advances like these have, historically, improved our life in terms of poverty, living conditions, schooling, and healthcare.

300 years ago, in Europe, most of the population lived as peasantry because somebody had to cultivate the farms. 2000 years ago in some place slaves made up 60% of the population.

Thinking that with AI only one dimension of our lives will change seems highly improbable to me. The printing press took way jobs from the scribes, but the revolution that book printing brought is one of the reason most people have electricity and tap water in their homes now.

So I'm more optimistic, I see AI being democratized and improving life overal in ways we can't imagine. There will be down-sides that we also can't imagine but there are a lot of down sides to how we live today.

The UX of UI on Linux can't compare with Windows, at least for me and I use Ubuntu with KDE (tried other GUI's as well) on my hope laptop and workstation and Windows 11 on my work laptop.

Windows just feels smoother and applying settings is more straightforward in most cases.

From your perspective it might seem weird. From the perspective of people who kill fish often, your reaction to the act would be weird.

Prison slave labor doesn't seem ideal for building 4nm chips.

I just commit --amend and the push -f to not waste brainpower on messages.

Yes, as it isn't a big factor in determining the behavior if the approach. You probably see, from time to time, couples really unequal in term of physical attraction so it isn't impossible to be with someone who is more physically attractive than you.

Maybe the set of behaviors the exude at work are attractive to other people they share the workplace with? Especially seeing they already have a big thing in common-place they spend a lot of time at.

Define attractiveness please, it is a bit of an ambiguous term.

My definition of attractiveness includes behavior, and the only unattractive behavior that might put your career at risk is if you ask people out in extremely awkward ways or don't handle rejection well.

Otherwise there should be no career risk to stating interest in getting to know a person more that you find interesting.

Why so?

Even companies that have dating rules codified, like Google, have no issue with you asking out someone, at least once. Being rejected and accepting it shouldn't lead to the end of your career.

Or am I missing something?

Maybe, but that notion of theft seems better than to live in a world where anyone can barge up to you and, for example, take your meal, leaving you hungry. Would you agree?

Stealing other people's money might be the more likely reason as humans tend to be very sensitive about this.

All species that consume other life forms are, we are just more efficient.

Source on that?

Its not comparable, a tanks armor and main gun are several classes above.

Nobody will use small-arms against a tank because it has no effect. That is the point.

Humans are also vulnerable to bullets yet we still use them on the battlefield. Cost of bullet vs human is probably a bit more than 10x.

There are no perfect weapons, tanks are vulnerable to ATGMs but if used correctly will overrun an ATGM positions. Ita a game of rock papper sciscors but with more than three options :D.

That is a take I see often on Twitter and HN but actual military experts tend to disagree [0].

The truth is the tank was never meant to be invulnerable piece of military hardware but one that can withstand small and medium calibre arms and shrapnel/fragmentation while also delivering direct fire to a front line location. In that regard there is nothing that can replace it yet and will continue to be used.

[0] https://warontherocks.com/2022/09/the-tank-is-not-obsolete-a...

> Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation

Who gets to say what is factual?

EDIT: This isn't a gotcha, I am genuinely curious about how we would establish a source of truth.

How do you know the service is zero marginal?

The terminals aren't the issue here hut rather the operational service provided to the terminals: the satellites providing connectivity.

Security options?

Your average consumer doesn't have to worry about nation state hacking attacks, electronic warfare, and artillery strikes.

Problem isn't Wikimedia and the world might be a better place if they had a trillion dollars.

The problem is that the donation campaign is falsely being advertised as if to keep Wikipedia, the site itself, alive but is instead given to Wikimedia

Isn't that misleading, even if you support Wikimedia and what they do?

When I donate to Wikipedia I expect that money goes to keeping Wikipedia alive not for the Wikimedia organization to redistribute the funds as they fit.

Why do I need a proxy for charity? If I want to give to some cause I will do so directly.

Could be a false flag, we don't know now and I don't think we will get the full truth. If it was the Ukranians they would never admit to it as the bridge is used by civilians and civilians died in the explosion. The same reason why Russia won't admit to its own terrorist actions in Ukraine.

As for the explosives, besides corruption, one could improvise in all sorts of manners, especially with the know-how and resources of a state actor.

By being packed with explosives. The video of the inspection of the truck before it crossed the bridge shows a not very thorough inspection and it was not X-rayed.

Also the underside of the bridge is untact as far as burn mark go.

Would the defense of "I just changed my password and don't remember it" work?

Occam's razor leads me to the conclusion that it was most likely done by the Ukrainian intelligence agencies and that the truck was loaded with explosives.

Question is did the driver know or was he unavare.

> I don't even know what I would do if the government "confiscated" my devices.

You do something (full disk encryption) before the government confiscates your devices.

> Hate speech, extremism, misogyny and misinformation are well-known byproducts of the internet.

It is a well known fact that, before the internet, these things didn't exit.