Did you compare AI companies to parents and engineers actually delivering value to toddlers? AI companies cannot, in any capacity, be regarded as caretakers.
"For the first decade of his career, he lived in an apartment and worried about paying for vacations. Then, in his early 30s (...)"
... here is America, without paid vacation guaranteed by law since the government does not truly care about the middle or working class. It's amazing how serious media can write articles about economy, while the blatant obvious deficits slip right by their nose..
Mandating by law paid vacations, laid parental leave, etc... doesn't make those things materialize out of thin air.
Every company accounts for those things and takes a bite off the paychecks of their employees to cover those expenses.
In america a lot of companies offer those without being mandated and those that don't have to offer higher salaries to stay competitive. End result is that employees that want can user those higher salaries to pay for the vacations or take some time off. And those that don't get to keep the extra money, of course.
Reminds me of when all the Silicon Valley freaks decided to suddenly care about the fertility crisis, but also would turn around and pronounce how young professionals need to be 996 slaves to survive their brave new world.
The blatant obvious deficits are where the money is made. The articles are written to help you focus either on pie in the sky or on meaningless stock jitters.
That's not how management works. The expenses will be reduced and profit increased by any means, all the time, forever, no matter how much profitable a company already is.
Well, there are many legitimate cases for using the equality operator. Insisting someone is doing something wrong is downright wrong and you shouldn't be teaching floating-point numbers.
A few use cases are: Floating-points differing from default or initial values and carrying meaning, e.g. 0 or 1 translates to omitting entire operations. Then there is also the case for measuring the tinyest possible variation when using relative tolerances are not what you want. Not exhaustive.
If you use == with fp, it only means you should've thought about it thoroughly.
See, AI was used to accelerate arrest and jailing, but not to follow through. It was not used to ensure her well being. Clearly this demonstrates that AI contributes to treating humans inhumanely, and demonstrably AI is not used to improve anyones quality of life. Stop making excuses for "AI not at fault here".
It doesn't matter if the icon is ever so slightly ambigious compared to other systems, the label text next to it removes any ambiguity and makes the message perfectly clear, as long as it is consistent within a product.
To any newcomer to a new system, most icons don't make sense, so the text next to it is an invaluable hidden tutorial.
OP didn't stop to see that the circled checkmarks look like clocks, so it just highly opinionated.
This should be compulsory for pitching architects and entrepreneurs. Prove that your design can withstand real weather and the washed out decay of time. Classical architecture withstands weathering and littering remarkably better.
Architects are even using corrugated steel sheets intended for ugly shacks as the fascade of new buildings intended for people to live in. It couldn't be worse.
Not only architecture. I recently saw a dirty Cybertruck and it looked like a cheap prop from a 1980s sci-fi movie. Made me think about how well the average Toyota is designed that it manages to look good even on a cloudy day while covered in a layer of dirt.
I wouldn't hold up Toyota as anything special. My old Toyota pickup looked like swiss cheese from all the rust. Have never seen a car rust so much as that one.
There is a reason why a Toyota Hilux or Land Cruiser is the vehicle of choice for the most demanding use: the "Technical", on and offroad ad-hoc military insurgency, across Africa. (1)
The Hilux has a deserved reputation as "indestructible". (2) Not literally, but the best reliability for the money. Even after the bodywork rusts.
It baffles me that contemporary architects don’t seem to be aware of the existence of rain. Why put white render on the facade of your building if it turns to green within five years? Why the hate for large overhangs that would solve this problem for cheap?
My wife worked at an in house architecture firm for a fancy brand. The amount of times design team wanted to “hide the top part of that wall because it looks too dark” is nauseating. They literally would make impossible buildings happen on design photos and then the higher ups would get mad when the building had walls…
If corrugated metal were not associated with shacks, would it be so concerning? Most materials can look good with the right execution. The difference comes from form and detailing.
"Classical" architecture is (thankfully) dead and will never return. It's too costly and we lack the skilled labour force required. For those that nonetheless demand it, we get cheap imitations of classical details that look worse than a simpler but well-considered alternative.
There have been some promising advances in automated machine carving of stone, but it's still expensive. It has a bright future as part of a hybrid aesthetic enabled by contemporary technology. We need to look forward and not back.
How is that different from today's SA, like CodeQL and SonarQube? Most of the feedback is just sh*t and drives programmers towards making senseless perfections that just double the amount of work had to be done later to toggle or tune behaviour, because the configurable variables are gone due to bad static code analysis.
Clearly present intent and convience like: Making a method virtual, adding a public method, not making a method static when it is likely to use instance fields in the future --- these good practices are shunned in all SA just because the rules are opportunistic, not real.
My experience at work: Claude regularly says to use one method over another, because it's "safer"... But the method doesn't actually exist in that language. Seems to get rather confused between C# and C++, despite also getting told the language, before and after getting handed the code.
The "Microsoft gave" framing is the exact right wording!, because Microsoft should never have had these keys in the first place. This is a compromise on security that sidesteps back doors on the low level and essentially transforms all Windows installations into Clipper-chip products.
