I worked on and created a lot of things, but when thinking ‘cool’, the fractal rendering I did a long time ago popped into my mind as well. It just looks cool, interesting, has variance and experimentation, and is very visual.

The author provided no evidence of it

They’re contextualizing and sourcing it plenty. It’s their impression from their experience, from their years of being in that field. In the later adding of comments at the end they go into different takes as well, reiterating that it’s what they saw or see in [their] big corp[s] [and those he talks to].

You’re saying people are rotating too often - which was one of their points. Not sure if you meant support that point or point it out [assuming they didn’t].

Sharing, because I had to look up Abstract Wikipedia

Abstract Wikipedia is an in-development project of the Wikimedia Foundation. It aims to use Wikifunctions to create a language-independent version of Wikipedia using its structured data.

Microsoft actually cut off Israel’s access to Azure…

After months of pressure and trying to silence internal criticism.

I had to look it up to make sure “months of” is correct. Wikipedia has the infos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Israeli_military_support 2023-2025, various employees fired

“Microsoft actually cut off Israel’s access to Azure” doesn’t really cover or adequately represent their behavior regarding this topic.

Probably in some AI training data sets. Not that those are particularly good backups.

maybe they also mean Israel/Gaza or the AI push

… Gitlab though; the only difference is you see more “a large premium customer is requesting this” comments!

I love those! /s 😄 It can certainly feel like a pattern, specifically for some tickets.

You can just take the L and say you didn’t see that the function definition that was “added” was just “removed” at the top.

That’s not what happened though.

Changing the indent of the def changes the definition. That’s my whole argument.

I don’t get why you say “of course”, agreeing with my point, but then “it was only the indentation that was changed”.

What I wrote. I wouldn’t want to do AI Thursday and kinda malicious compliance for a prolonged time.

I see, thank you for the clarification. I was quite confused because it seemed to be missing, this one didn’t quite seem correct. If they never even pushed it as a MR then that makes more sense. Then the whole “hasn’t been merged yet” is missing that it hasn’t even been created.

I see, thank you for the clarification. I was quite confused because it seemed to be missing, this one didn’t quite seem correct. If they never even pushed it as a MR then that makes more sense. Then the whole “hasn’t been merged yet” is missing that it hasn’t even been created.

An indentation change is a definition code change. And as I pointed out, it’s a py file, and Python is an indent-significant language.

So you’re using [] as an alternative function call syntax to (), usable with nullable parameters?

What’s the alternative? let x = n is null ? null : math.sqrt(n);?

In principle, I like the idea. I wonder whether something with a question mark would make more sense, because I’m used to alternative null handling with question marks (C#, ??, ?.ToString(), etc). And I would want to see it in practice before coming to an early conclusion on whether to establish as a project principle or not.

math.sqrt?() may imply the function itself may be null. (? ) for math.sqrt(?n)? 🤔

I find [] problematic because it’s an index accessor. So it may be ambiguous between prop or field indexed access and method optional param calls. Dunno how that is in Dart specifically.

The issue, presumably the PR (linked at the top of the issue because of reference).

Look at the code change. It gets inputs and loops over them and seems to do an in-place fixup. But the code indent is wrong, and it even changed the function definition of the unrelated next function. In Python, the indent-logic-significance language.

I assume they briefly showed the code on stage. Even then it should have been obvious to any developer. py file, messy indent, changes unrelated function.

Please correct me if this is the wrong PR.

I would make Thursday AI day and do everything with AI. And Friday is recovery day, where I discard everything that didn’t work, and do what I want, to recover motivation for long-term sustainability.

I wonder if and when they would notice a productivity difference. I certainly couldn’t and wouldn’t be able to do that indefinitely.

Makes me think used tokens, which is very easy to fake.

If I were in a malicious environment, I’d be interested in gaming the system, excessively producing AI code even if I never use it.

Now if only I had the motivation and commitment to create something similar!

Godot is certainly the easiest and simplest to install in terms of full engine and game dev IDE.

Whether they wanted to showcase or deliberately chose it for how it looks or not, I think the simple install onto a presentation desk/PC/Steam Machine may have been a reason as well.

I regularly write code.

My customer gave the go-ahead to use LLM in our project very recently. We’ll be trying it out. I’m interested to scope out its use and limitations especially. I’m skeptical it will increase efficiency for me overall. The project is too complex, my/our requirement on quality too high, and I’m thorough to the last var name and code formatting for readability and obviousness. I’m not sure whether I could find it acceptable to compromise on those.

Between customer communication, planning, review-prep, guiding and helping my team members, and doing reviews, and other tasks within the company, time for my own work can be reduced by a lot. Still, I have tasks I work on, and that includes coding.

Microsoft pushes cloud and AI with increasingly negative side-effects. Eventually, EU regulation steps in to require offline-capable OS with fair and obvious choice. Microsoft tries to argue security, but ultimately fails.

Microsoft continues to push and connect their services as one, with synergy effects. Eventually EU regulation and prosecution steps in, requiring a neutral OS that must not pre-install software or point to other products in OS settings and apps, etc. Integrations must be openly standardized first, before implementing their own.

Despite all this, and despite a move from EU and EU-national institutions to sovereignty through shared open source solutions, Microsoft retains their strong/prevalent market position because the market as a whole is not as strategic and concerned, and Microsoft products like office, onedrive, Teams, and their other business software and services remain a predominant and grab-first choice, and the security promise of big enterprise software, battle-tested, with strong established auth etc remains a big selling point for them.