Would have been awesome if there was step by step visualization where simple color transforms slowly upgraded until you get final result for easier understanding of what each thing is doing.
Otherwise quite hard to visualize changes in you head.
This is really questionable outcome. So you'll have your own custom OS riddled with holes that AI won't be capable of fixing because the context and complexity became so high that running any small bug fix would cost thousands of dollars in tokens.
Is this how tech field ends? Overengineered brittle black-box monstrosities that nobody understands because important thing for business was "it does A, B, and C" and it doesn't matter how.
Not an OP, but seems like you might be talking about different things.
Security could be about not adding certain things/making certain mistakes. Like not adding direct SQL queries with data inserted as part of the query string and instead using bindings or ORM.
If you have insecure raw query that you feed into ORM that you added on top - that's not going to make query more secure.
But on the other hand when you're securing some endpoints in APIs you do add things like authorization, input validation and parsing.
So I think a lot depends on what you mean when you're talking about security.
Security is security - making sure bad things don't happen and in some cases it's different approach in the code, in some cases additions to the code and in some cases removing things from the code.
I've had a pleasure of using GIMP recently on Mac. One of the worst UX/UI experiences I've had in quite a while. If that's where vibe coding leads to, then Photoshop is very safe from disruption.
Doesn't seem like Microsoft managers care - it's not their core business, so any time anyone complains about issues with GitHub they probably think something along the line of "peasants whining again".
Must be nice to be a monopoly that has most of the businesses in the world as their hostages.
At one point Gitlab seemed like it wanted to compete, but then they killed all the personal and SMB plans, and now they’re just out of the picture for a lot of people. Their team plan is more expensive that GH’s enterprise plan.
Gitlab was generous first, to rise as a valid alternative to GitHub. They never got the comminity aspect right, perhaps aiming for profitability with a focus on the runners instances which is how they make money.
With profitability, the IPO made sense.
GitHub probably had a different strategy..keep it generous, get the entire open source community, keep raising money and one day someone will buys us out for billions. We we are, Microsoft goal is to capture the community, it works. It's sticky.
Yes, but this also means that countless open-source projects are in what appears to be a precarious position. What if MS one day decides all this free hosting isn't worth it, and just cuts it off? There aren't really any alternatives I know of, except bad ol' Sourceforge I guess.
One thing about Google is that many anti-scraping services explicitly allow access to Google and maybe couple of other search engines. Everybody else gets to enjoy CloudFlare captcha, even when doing crawling at reasonable speeds.
Just today I wanted to get a list of locations of various art events around the city which are all located on the same website, but which does not provide a page with all events happening this month on a map. I need a single map to figure out what I want to visit based on distance I have to travel, unfortunately that's not an option - only option is to go through hundreds of items and hope whatever I picked is near me.
Do you think this is such a horrible thing to scrape? I can't do it manually since there are few hundred locations. I could write some python script which uses playwrite to scrape things using my desktop browser in order to avoid CloudFlare. Or, which I am much more familiar with, I could write a python script that uses BeautifulSoup to extract all the relevant locations once for me. I would have been perfectly happy fetching 1 page/sec or even 1 page/2 seconds and would still be done within 20 minutes if only there was no anti-scraping protection.
Scraping is a perfectly legal activity, after all. Except thanks to overly-eager scraping bots and clueless/malicious people who run them there's very little chance for anyone trying to compete with Google or even do small scale scraping to make their life and life of local art enthusiasts easier. Google owns search. Google IS search and no competition is allowed, it seems.
I'm not sure electric trucks that run off of batteries is a practical solution. Given the size and weight of trucks and cargo they require 10-15 times larger battery to provide noticeably smaller range. Throw in refueling time and it's really not the best solution for CO2 reduction. I'd prefer to see hydrogen-powered trucks. Use all that extra energy to produce hydrogen.
Naturally this is relevant only for current battery tech and capacity.
This is an often repeated talking point, but the reality on the ground has proven hydrogen vehicles to be failures every time they are tried.
Hydrogen trials outright fail or prove to be substantially more expensive overall than EVs every time they’re tried.
The hydrogen vehicles are more complicated, more expensive, have expensive fuel which is difficult to transport and store, have no economies of scale or a realistic path to on (unlike batteries and electric motors), introduce serious safety concerns, and lack the convenience of being able to refuel on site.
And EV trucks, like in every other category, are outselling hydrogen trucks by orders of magnitude. See recent China sales [0].
China at this point has massive economy of scale when it comes to EV, so of course they will try to turn everything into EV.
From what I could find, it appears that there's about 100x times more funding that goes into EVs R&D than into HFCVs. One might think that there could be solutions to most if not all listen issues with hydrogen trucks if there was enough interest in that field from private sector and governments around the world.
I personally would prefer that there was better battery tech which would take less space, weight and have more density. But we are not there yet, so hydrogen to me seems like a decent solution for trucking industry if only it had something more than token R&D funding.
But the problems with hydrogen are fundamental and inherent to it as a molecule, not something innovation can change.
- Energy required to get it from water is fixed.
- energy required to compress it (and got for it liquify it) is fixed.
- Explosion dangers and basically invisible flames are fixed.
- Difficulty in transporting are fixed.
> It appears that there’s about 100x time more funding.
That may be because battery technology has proven itself and has paths to scale (phone, laptops, battery storage, a million different consumer electronics) for any new advancement. While hydrogen has proven itself a failure time and time again and has no paths to scale.
At this point hydrogen powered anything are solutions in search of a problem.
EV trucks got a head start because we already have extensive electricity networks, though. That makes rolling out charging stations a lot easier than rolling out a hydrogen distribution network (the existing network to distribute gasoline will not work because it’s made for fluids, that of natural gas won’t work either because hydrogen molecules are so small, and the natural gas distribution network often doesn’t have the necessary density)
Because of that, EV trucks might be a local optimum.
Having said that, hydrogen is difficult to handle. To get reasonable power density, you have make it liquid, compress it, or do both. Purely liquid is impractical, given that it happens at 33K at normal room temperature, so you need pressure, lots of it.
Yes, and the energy required to compressed it to liquid form is immense, leading to high costs.
And until it’s made from something other than methane it won’t be a climate solution. In fact hydrogen production is a major climate problem that should be solved first before we consider wasting any green hydrogen on something that can be done cheaper with electricity.
Actually for most trucking batteries are already practical. Most trucks travel only one or two hundred miles a day, like doing deliveries or going from a port to a warehouse, or a warehouse to a location like a factory or store. And even long-range trucking is mostly with loads that are volume constrained, not weight, so the additional weight of batteries is not a big problem. The big advantage of batteries is lower cost per mile
It's good that there's some research into this - to confirm what is generally obvious to anyone who studied anything. You have to think about what you are doing, write things by hand, use the skill to improve and retain it.
Common example here is learning a language. Say, you learn French or Spanish throughout your school years or on Duolingo. But unless you're lucky enough to be amazing with language skills, if you don't actually use it, you will hit a wall eventually. And similarly if you stop using language that you already know - it will slowly degrade over time.
This tracks, reminds me of Cory Doctorow's talk on reverse centaur situation where he gave a nice rundown of the tech market of the past 15+ years.
Do anything and everything to remain in "growth stock" category. Spend money on useless features, on engineers working on those useless features - as long as it will make your company look like it has bright future and space to grow.
> There’s a bit of automation theory jargon that I absolutely adore: “centaurs” and “reverse-centaurs.” A centaur is a human being who is assisted by a machine that does some onerous task (like transcribing 40 hours of podcasts). A reverse-centaur is a machine that is assisted by a human being, who is expected to work at the machine’s pace.
Otherwise quite hard to visualize changes in you head.
reply