Readit NewsI mean it's possible an expert in the field was using ChatGPT to answer questions but is seems rather stupid and improbable doesn't it? It'd be a good way to completely crash your career when found out.
It's like saying "humans can't be thinking, their brains are just cells that transmit electric impulses". Maybe it's accidentally true that they can't think, but the premise doesn't necessarily logically lead to truth
This is self-evident when comparing human responses to problems be LLMs and you have been taken in by the marketing of ‘agents’ etc.
Or you need to restore your Postgres database and you find out that the backups didn't work.
And finally you have a brilliant idea of hiring a second $150k/year dev ops admin so that at least one is always working and they can check each other's work. Suddenly, you're spending $300k on two dev ops admins alone and the cost savings of using cheaper dedicated servers are completely gone.
Structs and interfaces replace classes just fine.
Reuse is really very easy and I use it for several monoliths currently. Have you tried any of the things you’re talking about with go?
I would not use Golang for a big codebase with lots of business logic. Golang has not made a dent in Java usage at big companies, no large company is going to try replacing their Java codebases with Golang because there's no benefit, Java is almost as fast as Golang and has classes and actually has a richer set of concurrency primitives.
Go’s lack of inheritance is one of its bolder decisions and I think has been proven entirely correct in use.
Instead of the incidental complexity encouraged by pointless inheritance hierarchies we go back to structure which bundle data and behaviour and can compose them instead.
Favouring composition over inheritance is not a new idea nor did it come from the authors of Go.
Also the author of Java (Gosling) disagrees with you.
https://www.infoworld.com/article/2160788/why-extends-is-evi...
If a scientist uses an LLM to write a paper with fabricated citations - that’s a crappy scientist.
AI is not the problem, laziness and negligence is. There needs to be serious social consequences to this kind of thing, otherwise we are tacitly endorsing it.