fuzzzerd

I routinely see AI taking the easy way out. Writing mountains of code to make tests turn green based in odd and unintuitive side effects.

That's not to say it isn't useful, and if youre on top of it you can guide it away from doing that.

In my case, the app offers functionality that isn't available on the web version. So I resentfully use the app, but I'd prefer all features were available via the web instead.

I have crystal clear full 1080p video of a burgler stealing several items from my garage.

When the police arrested him, six months later for another crime, the prosecutor decided not to pursue my case because of insufficient evidence.

Anecdotal, for sure. But it's no guarantee that it being on video means prosecution.

For me and my engineering friends I hope you are right.

I don't. It's a machine, it should be fast and efficient.

Diesel electric locomotives have been using this concept since the 1930s or 1940s.

I always follow 321 for important things. Three copies, two media types, one offsite.

While that is an important distinction, the fact you might need a downloaded driver for a screen is a bit ridiculous to begin with.

Same, and I'm learning that we're definitely a minority.

I've noticed similar behaviors and it feels like a regression. Older Opus versions didn't have that issue to this degree.

Windows phone had this exact feature. Obviously it didn't survive the duopoly of iOS and Android, but the feature was alive and well for many years before the whole OS was killed.

> If your a safe driver

That's the issue. So many people are burried in their phone or just simply driving irresponsibly for the conditions, these features may be better for them.

As someone who respects the responsibility of driving a vehicle, they're definitely making things less safe in some situations.

The issue isn't that it couldn't be done without technology. The problem is when everyone else has moved on to the technology based solution (mobile phones) if you don't you're just out of luck.

This is exactly the concern folks I talk with have. With all of the force reductions in the last few years attributed (real or not its how they're marketed) to AI gains, It's hard not to see that as a trend.

Sounds nice. I've seen places that have essentially given up email in favor of teams for all communication.

> "Can you accept that there can be a function named multiplyBy5 that does something else instead").

I think anyone that can understand a function can understand this, but one might not be happy accepting it's the case, and endeavor to change it.

I think it can be easy to lose sight of that distinction, and eagerness to fix it can be confused with not accepting it could be, but is also probably wrong.

Are there people that would legitimately argue point 1?

If you are only looking at the call site, sure that could be confusing, but if you are looking at the definition as provided in your post, surely anyone that is able understand the concept of a function can see the problem?

I'm not arguing they don't exist, sure they do, but I'm confused as to how you came up with it as a litmus test? Is it that common?

Surely we can agree in a real scenario renaming it (or fixing implementation to match name) is likely appropriate, but to completely miss the error?

Hope this comes across as curiousity, because I am curious about this one from your list in particular.

Agreed, but for some reason the majority of folks don't care about these externalities at all.

I see the externalities and the harm they are and may cause, and at the same time I find it increasingly difficult to avoid using LLMs as there is personal value to be extracted. Further, so many others are using LLMs to pump their productivity numbers (reality may differ and time will tell) its hard to keep up without using LLMs.

That's an interesting metaphor. Maybe it's because it does match my own experience, but I definitely agree and see it playing out in my own usage.

Obviously the stakes are lower, I still review code before making a PR, but the exhaustion from getting there is similar.

My child's school is the same, they use the diagnostic software. My question was more toward wondering if the diagnostic is as anemic as the learning version in terms of being adaptive.

If the learning software isn't actually adaptive, is the testing software?

That maybe true, value is producing simple solutions as requirements get complex, but will companies realize and value this?

Chicago does have rules for timely show removal on sidewalks. In practice I have never heard of anyone receiving a fine even when the walk in front of a property remains uncleared for weeks on end. There is essentially little to no enforcement.

While I think this is good advice, the fact that it's true feels backward to me. "We have a legal or contractual obligation to be less secure than we otherwise would be." Just seems silly.

Could make the same argument for SQLite, the threshold is lower, but similarly you can pretty far with it. Then decide what's next, once you're out growing it.

> AI+Competent Developer paid $300k TC > Competent Developer paid $400k TC >>> AI+Average Developer paid $30k TC >> Average Developer paid $40k TC >>>>> Average Developer paid $200k TC

Huh?

Thnks for sharing. Your process is something I have been trying to be more deliberate about, as I value and find happiness by some similar things and I appreciate how you describe it.

As opposed to a child uploading a selfie of an adult on a new account.

This term needs to catch on, this is the first I've seen it, bit it explains why so many prodict decisions are made and those who know better/different are just too small a minority to get any say.

We're dragged into this kicking and screaming and yet normies think we're the crazy ones.

I hate that future so much, but I don't know what to do to avoid it. My sole choice to bank on pc and use it as a pc will not be considered by the product people making the choice to go smart phone app only.

I'm essentially along for the ride because the masses will gobble it up.