The actual excerpt does read much more like Vonnegut.

Funnily enough, even though the quote is misattributed, the sentiment is basically the same as what Vonnegut was saying, albeit less eloquent.

I'm more shocked about FDR.

Libertarians aren't the brightest bunch to begin with, but regardless, saying "look at this community that was wrong" in response to people wanting to remove central authority is not really an argument against the idea.

The entire point is that people are free to govern themselves. Governing well is up to the local communities. Some would do better than others, certainly. But with time, people would discover what works and what doesn't. They would make mistakes like these and learn from the natural consequences of their actions. It's imperfect because humans are imperfect.

You might want to read up on what Anarchism actually is, since you seem to be pretty unaware: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism.

"not suited for human life"? Really? 10°C is... incredibly mild. Most humans are comfortable at that temperature with just a jacket and maybe a hat.

Cold weather is all about actually dressing appropriately. Every person I've ever heard bitch and moan about it are never dressed appropriately. With the right clothing, you can be comfortable at most any low temperature (obviously, extremely low temperatures require specialized clothing/equipment).

The same cannot be said for hot weather, where extreme heat is both dangerous and unavoidable.

I mean, that has nothing to do with phone calls and everything to do with them being shitty.

I suppose it depends on what kind of AI we're talking about. If you mean LLMs, then I certainly hope no one is trying to do something as foolish as that.

A lot of the stuff from James Webb is truly novel, as well, which no AI technology would be useful in understanding.

I never understood how anyone found those remotely interesting. Maybe they're just supposed to be funny but... I don't know. I don't get it. Always just seemed like taking an assortment of questions and stretching the implications of one's answers to the point of incredulity in order to shoehorn them into one of the set outcomes.

Like a choose your own adventure book where the outcomes only have the faintest connection to your choices.

Did the headline change? The current headline is Torvalds: "100% of Their Code is Written by Compilers" Too

The title of this post makes for a dumb headline, at any rate. Linus, in response to claims in the industry that projects are now "99% written by AI", drew an analogy to compilers by saying that all machine code for projects are written by compilers, yet no one says their project was 100% written by a compiler. It's just talking about stupid hype, which is valid.

That being said, it's still quite unfortunate that Linus has fallen into the trap of LLMs.

There was definitely syntax highlighting in the 90s: https://invisible-island.net/vile/vile.faq.html#clone_colors. Emacs actually introduced it earlier, in 1989.

CVS and Perforce did exist in the 90s for version control, though I certainly can't speak to how frequently they were used. I suspect it was the type of thing used by large corps, but eschewed by smaller shops.

Umm I use Jira and Confluence on Firefox every day without issue. Not sure what you're talking about. The only time I've ever had to use Chrome in my professional career were certain tools that require chrome dev tools. Otherwise, it's Firefox for everything.

Seriously. My argument against "LLMs are good at generating boilerplate" has always been "why are you putting up with needing to write boilerplate in the first place?"

I really do think that it's emblematic of a problem that existed long before LLMs: a lot of developers were/are deeply uncomfortable with stepping outside the confines of their IDE, and thus would basically never fix workflow/DX issues unless said fix came packaged as a feature by whichever megacorp was feeding them tooling. Scripting is all but unheard of outside of things like builds or CI.

I see this divide in my own organization, actually. Our mobile developers aren't really all that comfortable with stepping outside of what Android Studio/XCode can do and the workflows deined by Google/Apple.

Our backend team is very different. No one uses IDEa, and we're all Unix terminal folk for the most part. Lots of scripting and tooling we've created over time to streamline our development.

So when me and few other backend engineers decided to write a small Caddy file to set up a reverse proxy to enable the mobile emulators to talk to our locally-running backend (rather than a shared non-prod backend that the mobile teams always use, in order to facilitate more efficient end-to-end testing for features), we may as well have been talking an entirely different language when describing it. The very idea of creating your own tooling to solve a problem with your job is just entirely alien to them.