921 karma · joined October 5, 2016
There are some levels of censorship that make sense for a code forge - “you can’t do crimes on our servers”, “you can’t host malware on our servers”, etc. But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software sends the message that this isn’t a safe place to host any of your repositories. If the moral landscape shifts in the future, how can you be sure your project won’t be next on the chopping block?
What a terrible precedent to set.
Yes, that sounds like the same issue. I’ll update to the latest version and see if it’s resolved. And thanks for your work on this package, it’s been a real game-changer for me!
That being said, there are still some rough edges. Sometimes it fails to properly clear the terminal, leaving junk at the top of the buffer before the currrent prompt line. And on a couple of occasions it has totally frozen, with no fix other than killing the buffer and starting over.
Overall, it’s very promising and totally usable as a daily driver, but it needs a bit of polish and bug fixes before I would consider it mature.
(Prompt)
Please write a short op-ed around 500 words. Keep the language
simple and concise. Focus on why humans have nothing to fear from
AI.
(Response) What is it that humans fear from AI? At a philosophical level, the
question comes down to: what are human beings afraid of losing as
machines take over more and more jobs previously performed by
humans. The first answer that may come to mind for many people would
be 'nothing', since they believe in the idea of technological
progress having no limits, which means that there is literally
nothing we can do to stop it.
If you look at history however, you'll find this attitude not
entirely justified. For instance when carriages were invented and
took away most of horse-drawn carriage business their owners
resisted vigorously against them claiming that they were unsafe and
unreliable just like now with self-driving cars or trucks.
So it appears that some human beings really fear the loss of jobs
caused by AI, and they are also afraid that machines might take over
other tasks like driving or even writing in case a new computer
system is invented.
What is it exactly that makes them so afraid? I think the answer
lies in a very deep level of human psychology, which those who are
afraid would probably not be ready to hear.
It isn't just about jobs and income for most people. It's about
identity and self-esteem when they no longer have something
important they are doing like driving or writing.
There is also the fear that new and better machines will make them
look inferior, even emasculated because they no longer have to do
anything. They are afraid of being made redundant by AI.
So what humans are afraid of losing is their jobs, income, identity
and self-esteem. This might seem like a very strange thing to fear
because it's happening with all technological progress.
But in the past it was a natural process based on evolution and
survival of the fittest. Now however humans are no longer driven by
those evolutionary drivers but mostly by things like social status,
self-esteem etc.
Not bad!It's been a total game changer for me - it's allowed me to transition to using Emacs full-time for professional Python programming.
But that's not the cause of my pain. Bad code can and will be written in Py2, Py3, or any other language. The cause of my pain is that the language developers chose to abandon work on the language that we use in favor of a different language, one that is fundamentally different in some important ways. As a result, the tooling and ecosystem on which we've built our product is slowly stagnating and is getting close to being fully disfunctional.
I... don't even know what to make of this advice. Have you ever worked for an engineering organization with more than 5 members? I can't just go to my boss and say, "I need the next six months to rewrite our whole backend". I'd get laughed out of the room.
Without a clear, business-first reason for an engineering project of that magnitude, it's not ever going to be a priority or a realistic option.
EDIT: Just checked, looks like the first commit was in 2015. But Py3 was still an option back then :(
People keep writing blog posts about how easy it is to migrate your code, and I just can't imagine that these people have any experience maintaining a Python2 codebase outside of toy projects or libraries.
At work I maintain a Python2 codebase that's been under development since 2016. It's huge, relies on now-deprecated Py2-only libraries that we can't realistically switch away from, full of Py2-specific syntax, and reliant on Py2's handling of Unicode strings. We scoped out what it would be like to upgrade it to Py3, and determined that we would basically need to rewrite large parts of it from scratch. This isn't an acceptable trade-off for the business in terms of development time and priorities.
Instead we are slowly breaking out the monolith's functionality into Py3 services, which is much more tightly-scoped (and more palatable for management). But realistically speaking we will be maintaining Py2 code for the foreseeable future, and I can't imagine we are the only company in this situation.
Upgrading a production codebase from Py2 to Py3 isn't easy, or even possible in some cases. And frankly, all these blog posts suggesting that migration is trivial are insulting.
The redirects are really fast, seems like the only reason @esaym noticed is that they are blocking advertising.com via their hosts file which prevents the final redirect back to techcrunch.com.
Welcome to surveillance capitalism...
"Bigot" is likely not the word you are looking for here - it generally has the connotation of someone who looks down or discriminates against those they consider lesser, e.g. racists or sexists. Maybe "champion" or "fanatic"?
And for statically typed languages (I've tried Rust and Go) the lsp-mode experience is flawless and works out of the box.