"OpenTofu" is cute, but tofu has nothing to do with terraforming.
How about "Genesis" or "Reliant" or "Marcus" or "Kruge"?
terraform has nothing to do with terraforming either
Readit Newsuuids are ubiquitous and easy and implemented in many languages in the standard library - therefore a dev can get near-guaranteed uniqueness without thinking too hard about it.
Until another standard similar to what the article is suggesting becomes widely implemented in standard libraries then uuid isn't going anywhere, although in principle I agree with many of the arguments presented.
Aren't these processes mostly automated? Is it possible that not a single human has so far been involved on behalf of the copyright holder?
For music this is the case AFAIK.
stayfrosty420 commented on My First Impressions of Nix mtlynch.io/notes/nix-firs... · Posted by u/signa11
> or the vim-like overhead to learn it properly.
In my opinion, it's somewhat simpler than learning how to do Debian packaging properly (with emphasis on "properly", following all the modern best practices).
Quite a lot of folks that run Nix or NixOS write themselves decent derivations that could be (and frequently are) contributed to nixpkgs (of course, there are a lot of quirks/hacks as well). But I think quite a few folks who run Debian make themselves high-quality packages - e.g. why bother setting up cowbuilder and do the proper repo for gbp with all the pristine-tar branch oddities, when checkinstall does the trick.
Ah, I will concede I probably am just a huge idiot then. I suppose I don't often find myself needing to bootstrap a linux OS in this way.
stayfrosty420 commented on My First Impressions of Nix mtlynch.io/notes/nix-firs... · Posted by u/signa11
Nix reminds me about that xkcd comic about standards. It seems to be to be solving a problem solved in a much better way by other alternatives with the mindset of IT from a bygone era.
I may just not really be the target demo, or maybe am just a huge idiot, but I struggle to see the appeal, especially when you hear about the occasional horror stories about complex and/or broken environments, or the vim-like overhead to learn it properly.
stayfrosty420 commented on Functional Python Programming docs.python.org/3/howto/f... · Posted by u/meatjuice
@dataclass is the new final
stayfrosty420 commented on The toll of dating app burnout nytimes.com/2022/08/31/we... · Posted by u/irajdeep
>She recommends that app users stop scrolling and talking to other matches once they have found nine people they feel some level of connection with, and dedicate their time to really trying to get to know those people first.
That really seems like quite a lot to me...
stayfrosty420 commented on Why We Switched from Python to Go (2021) softwareengineeringdaily.... · Posted by u/hkallr
I prefer Go when I want more safety/performance than Python but less ceremony than Rust.
I think the latter point about "less ceremony" is extremely debatable especially on a larger project.
stayfrosty420 commented on Why We Switched from Python to Go (2021) softwareengineeringdaily.... · Posted by u/hkallr
"Developer productivity and not getting too creative" is NOT a point in favor of Go. Go does not have a lot of batteries included. Things like error handling, logging, test bootstrapping, etc, require consensus on the team and tight coordination. Every project is basically its own framework. Most teams are not that well-oiled.
They are going to find this out the hard way.
And fast? Please. If your database queries are a mess, or if you have no discipline elsewhere, it doesn't matter what language you use - you will blow right past the "superfast" baseline.
Very surprised this is getting downvoted, I think in two years from now everyone will be singing this exact song when the next flavour of the month arrives.
1. Bad grammar in a paper is incredibly irritating, which is particularly unfair for people who are non-native English speakers. If ChatGPT can help people to convert awkward English into nicer work without changing the ideas or confabulating, that seems like a win. I don't see why people need to "declare" their usage of ChatGPT for these purposes. Is that a standard now?
2. The major issue here is that the authors copied a response and accidentally also brought some button text with it. This is given to imply that people aren't reading ChatGPT's output. But I think this is just as likely to be benign. People do all sorts of silly nonsense in papers (including me), like leaving author comments in final drafts. It's bad and sloppy, but it isn't usually a crime.
3. Many papers on public servers are junky. Many journals and conferences are equally junky. Search for any bad string and you'll find it everywhere, and non-scientists will be scandalized.
4. I like the people at Retraction Watch and think they're doing the Lord's work. However sometimes I worry that immersing yourself in wickedness makes you see wickedness everywhere, and also creates an (unconscious) incentive to sensationalize bad stuff. I hope they're aware of this.