Sparkyte

Just ban all advertising.

I really wish that was the case. You can give it only so much context before it starts to go down a path where the context doesn't even make sense to it, and yet if you explained it to a colleague they would instantly understand.

Context has layers and really 1st or 2nd layers ever get reached by AI but it can't dive further because it is too focused on the final output rather than the continuation of the output.

For example you write code and then tell it what the final expect output is, it some how always divorces itself from rudimentary implementations and poops out something that cut a lot holes out or shortcuts all of your work. Removes modularity in favor of that immediate outcome. AI is just not good enough to understand the complex relationship of maintainable code and deliverable code. So it poops out what is easily made to meet the deliverable.

Such and interesting thought provoking situation. So much money circulates and thrives off the idea of advertising. The concept of YouTube would cease to exist. Some products would never even get off the ground without some level of advertising.

What constitutes advertising vs marketing?

Does product placement count as advertising or marketing?

Does opening up a pop shop count as advertising or marketing?

So much to this, ultimately we do need to regulate advertisements. But I am not sure we can survive without them.

Gentrification of certain areas are definitely making things visually stale.

Definitely squeezed.

They say AI, but AI isn't eliminating programming. I've wrote a few applications with AI assistance. It probably would've been faster if I wrote it myself. The problem is that it doesn't have context and wildly assumes what your intentions are and cheats outcomes.

It will replace juniors for that one liner, it won't replace a senior developer who knows how to write code.

If you are not committing any code that is a problem. But software development is more than just code. It is also more than just the individual.

There is a Tim for every successful team. Sounds like a solutions architect.

I believe so. I am also hoping it can just pull in repositories and tell me more about the code and history relating to it. There is a lot of potential to this. TLDRs are needed for code, LLMs will be an excellent replacement.

Absolutely this! If I have to use a search box to find docs and not the navigation pane you know you're doing something wrong with your docs.

I actually like re-writing documentation, but if I can not reorganize the documentation too I am discouraged from re-writing. I believe a lot of contextual information is lost when people use confluence as a dumping ground and don't plan the structure of the documents.

I've emotionally moved to git for documentation, but I can not get people to follow or transition to better documentation methods once someone is emotionally tied to tribal knowledge and communication.

I have a colleague who prioritizes maintaining control over teaching others. He tries to force a particular perspective, emphasizing the importance of his role while fostering dependency rather than sharing knowledge. This seems driven by a fear of losing his job.

My primary focus is backend development, where I assist developers and solve infrastructure challenges. However, I’m so effective in this role that I often end up boxed into it. I’ve been making an effort to expand into frontend development to broaden my expertise, but this colleague operates in that space and isn't the only one who has made it difficult for others to gain traction.

They can also generate documentation of code you've written. So it is very useful if leveraged correctly to understand what the code is doing. Eventually you learn all of the behaviors of that code and able to write it yourself or improve on it.

I would consider it as a tool to teach and learn code if used appropriately. However LLMs are bullshit if you ask it to write something, pieces yes, whole code... yeah good luck having it maintain consistency and comprehension of what the end goal is. The reason it works great for reading existing code is that the input results into a context it can refer back to but because LLMs are weighted values it has no way to visualize the final output without significant input.

Let me alter this perspective, you can use it to learn why parts of code does and use it for commenting. Help you read what might be otherwise unreadable. LLMs and programming is good, but not great. However it can easily be someone to teach a developer what parts of the code they are working on.

I dont think it is making developers dumb, you still need to audit and review the code. As long as you augment your writing by relying on base templating, finding material to read or have it explain code. It is really good.

I have growing concerns with the increased costs of WAFs. I am certainly not getting excited about how expensive things are getting from places like Akamai and Cloudfront. I'm just idly waiting to see where things land. An OpenSource solution is nice although the costs for infrastructure do crank up. Wonder how this compares to Fastly?

I see others mention it isn't a truly free even if Open Source, is this thread an ad?

Makes you feel naked. I am running Firefox now, but there is a debacle on that now.

The trade offs between them are meaningful. Also Rust ain't bad for an AOT.

You don't, there are equal trade offs. JIT might use more memory because of what it does at the runtime, but it is also the exact reason it is faster to start. A good trade off is just using the type of languages best suited for the workload.

This ^

I feel like people like to fear monger, but cloud businesses won't bend to US requests for anything that resides outside of the US.

Only if the systems operate in within their jurisdiction. Systems residing outside of their jurisdiction are not susceptible to the same policies and requests. Most cloud providers in international spaces provide secure government solutions that are designed around the regional policies.

It's true that relying solely on a cloud ecosystem without continuous protections isn't safe. That's why many government agencies should consider what I classify as a co-location strategy. By implementing this approach, agencies can use private tunneling applications with encryption and APIs to securely fetch non-sensitive information.

The cloud provider—such as AWS—can still be used for application hosting, but a private network should be established between the cloud environment and the co-location facility.

Why is this beneficial?

In a cloud environment, public ingress can be cut off instantly if needed, minimizing exposure.

Applications can be designed to serve most (or all) of their data through regional gateways connected to the co-location.

By placing co-location facilities close to critical data sources, latency is reduced while ensuring data remains protected and accessible within a secure network.

This approach allows organizations to balance cloud scalability with enhanced security, ensuring critical data remains under strict control while applications remain flexible and resilient.

As someone who directly worked on Ruby on Rails with developers, their worflows and deployments. It is far too niche to be viable in the mainstream and provides even less incentive to newer languages.

But it is a fun language.

Also latest Python is faster than the current Ruby let that sink in. You can go even faster if you do a compiled Python like PuPu.

While Elon is known to bullshit I do not doubt that the system was being drained with corruption. Social Security kept falling short, but there was no reason for it to. As people die and fall off social security which is designed to last till a person is 90 should be able to gracefully adjust to inflation.

Make that thousands. Actually I probably could keep my mouth shut, but wth. 150 year olds!

Kubernetes is an abstraction of VMs so that single container can be implemented in the absence of a code package. The container is the binary in this circumstance. Unfortunately they lose control of blame shifting if their deployment fails. I can no longer be the VMs fault for failure. What is deployed in lower environments is what is in Prod physically identical outside of configuration.

This will probably cause accidents left and right. May even increase road rage. I know I would just drive my Jeep off into a river if I spent money only to be targeted for ads.

In a sense abstraction does. You stop learning the fundamentals of how something works. Long enough as time goes by no one knows how the fundamentals work and a company fails.

Right, that part I agree with.

Microservices if used sparingly in the right way are fantastic as they can offer flexibility in APIs that do not necessarily need a monolith obfuscating certain behaviors away from the monolith making the architecture more secure.

Everything needs to be purposefully built and used with the intention of serving the customer's needs without compromise.

It totally struck my funny bone. It was very humerus.

Most to all I agree. I disagree with monoliths and microservices. I am not a fan of microservice per se but I'm not a fan of monoliths either. I certainly prefer a mix depending on their use cases. However both designs deserve equal scrutiny.

My monolith horror started when I was working with Ruby developers. The problem with a monolith is when it becomes too big for itself. Realistically something between microservices and monoliths are where quality of life resides.

If you need a small service that needs to be fast and focused microservice it. If you need a service where it relies heavily on the same logic and shared across many things. As long as it is performant, modular and easy to fix, monolith it.

Either way conforming to one design certainly cripples the potential of services.