Garlef

Even if manual jobs were safe from being replaced by AI (for the sake of the argument, we're assuming that this is what's going to happen) these jobs would not be safe from the market pressure created by the displacement in other areas.

Here's a link to a video where the creator explains the idea

https://youtu.be/6AgndHSkHFI?t=238

(You could of course argue that you don't like the direction the rules push the agents in given in the example - some people don't prefer small functions everywhere - but that's not the point: The lint-hooks work in pushing the agent in the desired direction; If one desires something else they'd simply need different rules)

I think they even more so need deterministic feedback:

I tried an approach based on the following idea recently and it's amazing - Lint rules where the error messages contain an explanation on how to deal with the issue.

https://habit-hooks.com/

I'm using it to foster IOSP (integration operation segregation principle) for example.

openrig also seems to fit

Interesting. They're good in some ways and bad in others.

I was reminded of the amateur paintings by George W. Bush II.

My favorite security feature is when pasting into the set-password field is disabled...

As in gherkin/cucumber? Or more generally?

(the language... I, for the love of it, can't remember which is which)

I like the "DB > LSP" idea.

True - in the long run. But that's quite expensive. And you'd need a bigger org to even support this.

They even named the model after "Jevons Paradoxon" - They anticipate that their model lowers the cost of adopting this kind of AI significantly, unlocking a lot of use cases.

Yes this would be one way. But maybe a suite of plungins that allows other renerers to consume .rel files might make for a better ecosystem.

To explain the use case: One advantage would be: maintain model (and views) in C4, provide layout on top.

We recently generated a big C4 model of the whole company. Good and informative since you can click through it! But it doesn't look nice and doesn't tell a coherent picture visually.

1. awesome ~ this seems to be in a sweet spot! (yes, mermaid is fine; but often looks bad - esp when visualizing large diagrams)

2. it would be great to have this as a layouting layer for C4

3. which brings me to a suggestion: i think it would make sense to allow for decoupling the topological parts of the language (arrows, groupings, etc) from the layouting concerns (left of, right of, etc)

The difference is that you don't need training here; The decision graphs can be built on the fly by an LLM and contain instructions in plain language.

The magic moment for me from the Jev release was not that there was some system playing doom: Rather it was the moment, they just changed a part of the prompt to "don't shoot, just dodge" and the behavior changed immediately.

This means you can have a system with fast decision-making but still interact with it via language.

I think the people behind jev made their intended use clear by labeling as "system one" - so they anticipate that there's a slower "system two" mediating jev

Oh wow... Basically our generations "You've got mail"

(caveats of course): memory and processing is restricted on the old systems; so these kind of simplifications might be the only way to deliver a big game

Never mutate the source of truth

yes; and it could also be used to spot unexpected behavior such as inputs not registering due to rare bugs

Even more so with billions of dollars of debt

Yes... But I think this only tells half of the story.

What if you pass a reference and mutate the object inside the function?

I don't know.

What's the tl;dr here?

"I'm one of the last few who needed convincing, now listen to my thoughts on what's next!"

isn't it often like this: the fines escalate if ignored?

- new requirements

- ignored => small fine

- still ignored => large fine

- not ignored anymore

> but I have seen people catch a ball

from what i remember, dogs sometimes run in curves so that the perceived trajectory of the object they try to catch is more linear

so not everything might be in-brain math but also good trickery

because JSON is in the following sense "universal":

every format/structure that has numbers, strings, booleans, null/none, finite lists of items, and string-indexed records of items already contains JSON

and that's pretty much the barebones you need for a configuration language

(of course you can argue about the syntax)

both, of course :)

i prefer to do it by hand (and in some environments you can also define aliases/macros so that the different constructs you're dealing with are typeset consistently and you don't have to re-type everything)

fancy words; it's true, though ~ i think it was clear from the moment LLMs entered the scene that (if) one day they would be able to write code ~ then the real challenge would be to integrate the output into our organizations ~ and this integration would not work without changing the orgs

There's a language for it (LaTeX).

It looks like this:

\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-x^2}\,dx = \sqrt{\pi}

It makes sense for multiplayer FPS since it gives you more room to have one key per weapon.

My quake 3 bindings where roughly:

Mouse wheel down - Rocket Launcher

Mouse Wheel up - Plasma Gun

Q - Shotgun

W - Lightning Gun

...

This lets you switch directly to the weapon you need without cycling through the weapons in between.

I know.

But I was trying to reach the person who left the parent comment.

And hitting them with a phrasing that is directly poststructuralist seemed to be the wrong approach since they appear to operate in a structuralist framing.

The word has not only one but several clear meanings:

> In the context of art history, modernity (Fr. modernité) has a more limited sense, modern art covering the period of c. 1860–1970.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernity

I think one of the watershed developments will be fast models.

Imagine current frontier models at 20k tokens/second.