rootnod3

So, hands-off meaning "just let the AI cook and don't check it"?

Either you follow everything it does, revise the plans, do the code review, manual adjustments, etc, or you run sessions in parallel, not being that attentive and constantly context-switch (also resulting in less attention I guess).

I fail to see the benefits honestly.

And then Anthropic has an outage and you what...have a coffee break until then? All that time babysitting the AIs just to be a little faster but probably with less knowledge/control over what they did?

- PAIP - The Art of of the Metaobject Protocol - Modern C

Those alone are the ones I've been re-reading this year.

Exactly, the amount of patches needed in many FreeBSD or other BSD ports just to appease the Linux-centricity is bonkers. And many times the changes aren't even that grave.

Without a system prompt no. And in general they “know” nothing and just predict the next best word.

"haskell user smart". Condescend much?

And Haskell baking itself to Nix, also not sure if that is a good option. Try compiling that on say OpenBSD or FreeBSD.

Preferably there would be more implementation. But if they only implement the "standard" language, it will be missing a lot of things. That is the point! It's not Haskell anymore. It's Glasgow Haskell. It's its own language at this point.

Again, those are _GHC_ extensions, not "standard" Haskell. At this point it's not Haskell, it's Glasgow Haskell.

And those features are not a library that you just throw in, they are compiler specific.

But...so does the tech sector. They will also have to continually upgrade their AI slop data centers to run newer better models, generating a heap of waste along it. And that money has to be made back.

I think the GHC directives are what hurts Haskell the most. At this point they should just embrace the GHC extensions and make it the "official" Haskell.

Having to enable them in the code is just a hassle. Just make it official and be done with it, just roll it into the language.

They definitely do embrace merging AI slop now, so they might even take pull requests.

This.

A while ago I made some blog posts[1] diving into the source code of OpenBSD and FreeBSD (shameless self plug), but haven't had the time recently to write more.

Being able to understand the system, or at least being able to take a quick look when something doesn't work is very refreshing. Not to mention the outstanding man pages. Barely need to google things.

[1]: https://blog.wollwage.com/

I use it for my mailserver (thank you openbsd.amsterdam), for the gateway in my homelab, a dedicated OpenBSD VMD machine in my homelab, and on personal machines (Macbook Air M2, a Thinkpad X220 and on a T480 that dualboots OpenBSD/FreeBSD).

For mailserver I think it is the best option. And for Gateway, PF is just wonderful.

But even on my laptops I enjoy it. It is rock solid, and I have pretty much no complaints.

Only M1 and M2 machines though. M3 and up is still missing.

99% of the time I run dwm + emacs, most of the browsing in eww. The occasional 1% that I run a browser is negligible. The scrolling lag doesn't bother me too much. I basically run it as a distraction free machine with long battery life.

No temptation to open Youtube or other distractions.

Just an emacs session with code and notes. Forcing myself to read the man-pages first before googling anything.

Still better than an error message with pretty much zero info.

Same. Recently bought myself a M2 Air as a birthday gift for myself. 8GB, chucked OpenBSD on it and couldn't be happier. It does what I need, battery lasts long and easy to chuck around.

And same as vibe coding, microwaves just reheat old stuff and create bland food.

So, best to just use <insert most popular language> for maximum results? And have the LLM just rehash the majority of what that language's code looks like? Because a lot of say Javascript code I have seen floating around on Github has been absolutely atrocious. That doesn't really give a good basis for LLMs.

I agree that stronger type systems might help. But a good swatch of unit tests should still accompany that code.

The Clojure code I have worked with usually had a damn good array of unit tests as its more of the "clojure" culture to do so.

Because most languages don't have a full interactive REPL like for example Common Lisp has. The Python REPL for example is a joke compared to it. Clojure is very closely there, but not quite yet.

Live image editing is just pure bliss.

Then why would SuSE spend money on it?

Cool, one more layer of indirection and abstraction. May I ask why? I fail to see the point, but I might just be grumpy.

I don't even know where to begin here... Using Haskell, the one language where you really DESIGN by types and use your brain and then using LLMs....

Modern software. That's why I stick with Emacs or Neovim.

That should be off by default. That alone is a "I won't use this" for me.

> Our priorities are clear: availability first

That's a delayed April fool's right?

Hardcover not available on .co.jp, shame

And that expert will not have their knowledge from learning through AI

Yeah, waiting for that too. They should expand the regions instead of new models. Availability is really limited.

I get adding Scheme, but omitting CL seems like a big oversight