Readit NewsIf you're executing the operations interactively, you're seeing what's happening on the stack, and so it's easy to keep track of where you are, but if you're reading postfix expressions, it's significantly harder.
Playing with APL has really changed the way I look at both.
* People using it as a tool, aware of its limitations and treating it basically as intern/boring task executor (whether its some code boilerplate, or pooping out/shortening some corporate email), or as tool to give themselves summary of topic they can then bite into deeper.
* People outsourcing thinking and entire skillset to it - they usually have very little clue in the topic, are interested only in results, and are not interested in knowing more about the topic or honing their skills in the topic
The second group is one that thinks talking to a chatbot will replace senior developer
* people who use it instead of search engines.
* people who use it as a doctor/therapist/confidant. Not to research. But as a practitioner.
There are others:
* people who use it instead of man pages or documentation.
* people who use it for short scripts in a language they don't quite understand but "sorta kinda".
Revenue $32 B
Operating Costs $7 B [1]
Estimated Profit $25 B
Operating Margin ~78%
Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits.
Fun Fact: During the Epic trial, it was revealed that Apple's profit margins on the App Store were so high that even Apple's own executives were sometimes surprised by the internal financial reports.
---
edit: There is no ideological argument for voluntary action here. The entire goal is to force regulators to step in. The debate over 'good vs. bad companies' is just online noise and rhetorical trik, no one on either side of the political spectrum wants these systems to be fixed voluntarily with corporate altruism.
Been on both sides of hiring.
On the hiring side, I no longer believe in skills shortages unless there's obvious particulars. Especially when I don't see those complaining doing any human development around the issue so I rapidly roll my eyes. I've hired people with 1 year experience and gotten better applicants than 3 years. Its becoming clear we can vet people within a month. Much cheaper to bulk hire then let them go as they wash out. Oddly enough they can wash out and still often be transferred elsewhere internally with good results. Hiring for human skills like work attitude and the person's ability to execute has its benefits.
I've seen so many ads for senior this or that but nothing for juniors. So when I see "we can't find skilled people" complaints I'm no longer as forgiving as I otherwise would be.
Of course this opinion is based on my direct experience so others will likely not agree.
My sense of using LLMs for coding is me feeling like a maintenance programmer even though the code is brand new and I'm debugging a LLM misunderstanding. Weird to be working on a 10k codebase that didn't exist a few hours ago and I'm now debugging it over the next 4 hours. Having it done around 16-20 work hours later is really strange.
Python/Ruby/Erlang et all still have a lot of horsepower so I'd not discount them yet.