Deleted Comment
So, clearly, almost nobody does that anymore. So according to Karpathy's definition, we have all been vibe coding for quite time now. (An aside - if AIs were any good, they would just skip human languages entirely and go straight to binary.)
So I think the "vibe" in vibe coding refers to inputting a fuzzy/uncertain/unclear/incomplete specification to a computer, where the computer will fill in details using an algorithm which in itself is incomprehensible for humans (so they can only "feel the vibes").
Personally, I don't find the fuzziness of the specification to be the problem; on some level it might be desirable, having a programming tool like that. But the unpredictability of the output is IMHO a real issue.
Would Boeing or John Deere be responsible for marketing language or just the instruction manual. We know the latter is true. It's there any evidence of the former? Intuitively I would say it's unlikely we'd blame Boeing if a pilot was mislead by marketing materials. Maybe that has happened but I haven't found anything of that sort (please share if aware).
When I worked on unmanned vehicles, you could have one operator control multiple speedboats because you typically had minutes to avoid collisions. Splitting attention would not be feasible with a car on cruise control, because you are never more than a few seconds away from crashing into something solid.
I don't fear famine, but I worry about what we're doing to our planet.
I think "lab-grown" is a pretty neutral term, and it is also scientifically accurate in the case of CVD and other diamonds where the process really is "growing" the diamonds. There are certainly other terms for them that sound more derogatory such as "synthetic" or "artificial" diamond.
Which, to humor the parent, is also true of raw bytes strings. One of the (valid) points raised by the gist is that `str` is not infallibly encodable to UTF-8, since it can contain values that are not valid Unicode.
> This also allows you to work with strings that contain arbitrary data falling outside of the unicode spectrum.
If I write,
… I want the input string to be Unicode. If I need "Unicode, or maybe with bullshit mixed in", that can be a different type, and then I can takeIt's a common mistake. A lot of code was written using str despite users needing it to operate on UnicodeWithBullshit. PEP 383 was a necessary escape hatch to fix countless broken programs.