No he bent the knee pretty badly and made a few headline sounds deals that do little to impact Canada's standing. Frankly Canada doesn't really have any choices the USA will never allow them to "distance" themselves and Canada doesn't really get a choice in the matter.
QQQ is problematic because it’s influenced by strange back room dealings with Space X, if the article is to be believed.
VTI is different. It literally tracks all public stocks, weighted by market cap so no such manipulation is possible.
If a bunch of people will be forced to buy Space X (QQQ holders), active investors will short the stock in anticipation and money will flow from those who were forced to buy. Total market will be unaffected, assuming efficient market hypothesis.
But why do print on demand books have to be low quality? It’s actually a pretty genius idea. You order a book, an automated machine prints out a high quality book indistinguishable from a regular paperback, pops it into a box and it’s ready for shipping. You could probably print one in under 5 minutes.
If you're producing a technological artifact and you are ensuring it has certain properties while working within certain constraints, then in my mind you're engineering and it's a question of the degree of rigor. Literal engineers as a rule don't build the things they design, they spend a lot of time managing.
I think most smaller Wayland compositors are using a library (wlroots, smithay) for most (?) of the compositing. If using a library provides a few extra options, while still allowing sharing code, it feel like the API boundary was put in the right place.
When there was the 90deg off bug, was that a bug in the compositor or in wlroots?
I’ve spent the last couple of weekends building something I’m genuinely excited about: #ClawDesk (clawdesk.dev) .
It started as an experiment inspired by #OpenClaw — but the goal was never to make a copy. The goal was to build a version with a stronger core, cleaner design, and better security foundations.
I'm with you on honesty, and I've certainly seen people tacitly trying to pass off AI outputs as human written. But I think we've reached a point where, in lots of contexts, we can't reasonably assume human authorship by default any more. (We can reasonably want it and push for it! I just mean we can't literally expect it.) So even when we would prefer openness, I think 'lying by omission' is too harsh a characterisation for people who choose not to declare AI authorship but don't actively try to cover it up.
> If someone is making the kind of mistakes that cause oncall issues to increase
the problem is that identifying the root cause can take a lot of time, and often the "mistakes" aren't clearly sourced down to an individual.
So someone oncall just takes the hit (ala, waking up at 3am and having to do work). That someone may or may not be the original progenitor of said mistake(s).
"Bigfoot" isn't inherently a conspiracy theory. If you say that bigfoot exists, you're wrong, but not necessarily a conspiracy theorist. To be a conspiracy theorist, you also have to posit a grand conspiracy to conceal the existence of bigfoot.
If you posit a conspiracy that only involves a few people who could plausibly coordinate to conceal the truth, that's also not a grand conspiracy, and we don't call people conspiracy theorist for believing in regular, everyday criminal conspiracies.
It doesn’t strike me as AI. The writing is reasonably information-dense and specific, logically coherent, a bit emotional. Rarely overconfident or vague. If it is AI then there was a lot more human effort put into refining it than most AI writing I’ve read.
This is a good answer, and I agree that having a good production intuition like this is important. You're probably also right that having AI do it probably doesn't get that value.
I'm not sure I'd do this once a day. I tend to take note of things to build that intuition when I have other reasons to go and look at dashboards, and we have a weekly SLO review as a team, but perhaps there's a place for this in some way.
> The main difference between my workflow and the authors, is that I have the LLM "write" the design/plan/open questions/debug/etc. into markdown files, for almost every step.
>
> This is mostly helpful because it "anchors" decisions into timestamped files, rather than just loose back-and-forth specs in the context window.
Would you please expand on this? Do you make the LLM append their responses to a Markdown file, prefixed by their timestamps, basically preserving the whole context in a file? Or do you make the LLM update some reference files? Thank you.
Author here. To be clear, we do not in ANY WAY compete with Yjs! We are a potential customer of Yjs. This article explains why we chose not to be a customer of Yjs, and why we don't think most people building real-time collaborative text editors should be, either.
I don't even think I'd have the right to tear down anyone's list -- I actually think that even if an 22-year-old replied with a list of ten movies from 2016-2025 that he went to the cinema to see, and which he would be happy to recommend, that'd be enough for me!
I brought up this list: https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/guide/essential-2000s-m... and scrolled through, and I think I saw at least half these movies either in the theater or as rentals, and most of the ones I saw I loved. Furthermore, I think at least a third are major contributors to the American cultural canon, both as being in the zeitgeist in the season of their initial release as well as being remembered going forward. For instance, people still today make references to "Mean Girls" or "The Dark Knight" or "Minority Report" that only fully make sense if you've seen those films or at least know they exist and their premises. And I think it would be pretty easy to make a list of 50-75 significant movies each from the 80s and 90s, but I'm focusing on ones during my adulthood to follow the spirit of your ask.
This is what I can't imagine finding ten of in the past decade. I'd be tempted to put "Barbie" on that list potentially, given how many memes I've seen using frames from it. Also, honestly, several Pixar films deserve to be on the list too, though I admit that I'm biased because they're some of the few that I've seen.
Honesty is the whole problem with ideas like this. If you're the kind of deluded idiot that considers LLM-generated crap "your code", stating exactly how little you had to do with it is not in your advantage. Far easier to maintain the lie.
Can you please stop posting so abrasively? It's not that this one comment is so bad, but you have a long pattern of doing so, and we're trying for something else here.
TNG suggested kids in elementary school were learning calculus but honestly I'm not sure that's a reasonable thing developmentally. Just because the technology improves doesn't mean humans get smarter faster. The cadets here are college students, and generally speaking, pretty competent ones. (God, college kids were dumb everywhere I went to school.) Also technical talent and emotional development are separate topics. I'm also not sure I agree technical understanding has to continue to grow with technology.
Computing technology is much further today than it was twenty years ago, but kids these days understand less about them because the technology is abstracted away better. (People use iPads now with no idea how a file system works.) In the 32nd century stuff feels magical, a lot of people probably don't need to know how it works to use it.
Floating nacelles make plenty of sense if they're independent drive units with all necessary components in the nacelle, consider they create a warp bubble around the entire assembly, but you can obviously wirelessly control a separate structure and the ships can manipulate them with force fields and such. Think about how many times a ship in earlier shows scraped a nacelle and exploded, separation is good design if technology now allows it. And remember... this is like many hundreds of years after Starfleet had timeships that could beam a person to and from any place in space and time. If anything the technology in this series feels a bit not magical enough for the time period.
