On the other hand React Native is a JavaScript based development language developed by Facebook to make applications run slower and worse.

Object oriented programming was a mistake

People forget that crashes are a debugging tool indicating an error. Silent errors can be much more dangerous. C and C++ in particular need to be careful not to overwrite random memory for example.

Yes the consequences for JS failures are less severe and so JS can get away with it, but a crash is a way to know your program isn’t doing what you thought it was, properly.

It just so happens that JS is used in contexts where nobody really cares, and errors aren’t a big deal, cheap and fast wins.

deleted by creator

That’s a fair point, improving the subscription feed would be in their best interest for the people who use it, even if that number is low.

The problems with that feed which he touched on in the video are pretty significant. If you subscribe to channels that put out lots of content and ones that rarely do, it becomes much harder to use.

One thing he didn’t mention is also that it’s not conducive to discovering and gradually catching up on the back catalogue of a new channel, which is something the home feed excels at.

I’m sure YouTube prefers you use the home feed and has no plans to improve subscriptions, and there are real issues with it, so it’ll probably continue to decline.

you’re ruining the catchy slogan, it’s like you don’t even want this to be Reddit

I didn’t think your point was as shallow as “different people can have different opinions”

I fail to see how this invalidates that someone can hold both the position that current AI is a waste of electricity and pumping out garbage while pointing out the potential social and economic disruption of future iterations of the technology.

If your point was simply that some people hold one position, others hold the other, and others still hold both. Then… thanks? I think we can also call this a waste of electricity.

It seems you’re firmly entrenched and going out of your way to see a contradiction. I’ll let you be.

Consider that there’s no widespread double-think happening and it could just be in your own head at this point.

The cars that replaced horses were several iterations in, early “automobile” devices included steam powered carriages that moved slower than walking.

A technology may start with limited usage while still having lots of potential.

Technologies are always useless until they’re not.

Agreed. I’ve been following the technology of neural networks and generative AI since before LLMs were the new hotness and it’s fascinating and powerful stuff.

My qualms with what’s happening now are more about how we organize our economy and society. Rushing them to market, aggressively trying to cull workers, etc. are critiques of capitalism not AI. In a different world we would all be excited about the prospect of having to work less and reap the benefits of AI, but we wouldn’t be reopening coal plants and leaving people to starve on the street.

Early cars weren’t a threat to streetcars and trains and urban planning but modern cars have reshaped every North American city. You can criticize the inefficiency, poor quality, energy waste, etc. of the technology today while also pointing out the dangers of tomorrow.

are those competing?

It’s being rushed to market and is still very inefficient, but part of the reason it’s being rushed to market is because companies are getting ahead of themselves about the opportunity to fire human employees.

And no matter how many protectionist measures that the US implements we’re seeing that they’re losing the global competition. I guess protectionism and oligarchy aren’t the best ways to accomplish the stated goals of a capitalist economy. How soon before China is leading in every industry?

It’s not about the sweets and cigarettes it’s just about the wealth acquisition. Same then as it is now. Companies are still using slave and otherwise coerced labor to extract all kinds of wealth from foreign countries.

If any countries try to take control over their own economy by closing it to Western “investment” they get wrecked by the world bank and invaded or sanctioned by the US and/or its allies.

Global capitalism is neo-colonialism.

I don’t understand what you mean. I’m suggesting that China could be making a big deal of old news now that they are offering a viable alternative to Intel chips. Possibly to drum up more business globally, or to have an excuse to ban Intel chips domestically.

It could also be to make that threat in the face of increasing trade war escalation from the United States, as a sort of “watch what you’re doing” warning.

Probably just posturing in preparation for trade war escalation or threats around banning Intel chips now that they’re ready to take on those markets. https://www.ft.com/content/5511d73a-1ada-4884-a559-681502300e4f

I basically stole your comment but made a worse version. On this note, though, there’s sometimes value in using words like “fix” or other kinds of tagging or consistent formatting in the sense that you can do a meta-analysis of the repo history to look at trends (like the ratio of fixes to feature work) over time.

Issue tracking software obviates that, somewhat, but having that info embedded in the repo history lets you go further and look at which files have the most fixes etc.

Existing tools out there sometimes do this exact thing, but it can be manually done as well

Knowing you fixed a bug is minimal information and usually covered by an issue reference in professional software development. I’d prefer to see the commit describing what the fix is actually doing to fix the bug.

This is not only irrelevant but it erases the nature of global contributions to free and open source software.

How many Russians, alone, contributed to these?