Rather than having the LLM and human devs all guessing from verbose variable names, can't they both use a language server that observes the code and can surface that kind of structure info cheaply?
Part of the point of types is enforcing more of the contract at various code boundaries (function, module, etc), and that enforcement is specifically so that you don't have to keep the whole codebase in your head / context window in order to be able to work on it.
3D printed to the finest details, heck it can even store like half a picture.
I fondly recall pirating Strike Commander on 35 floppies, it took quite a few sessions to transfer this since there was quite often some data reading error... good memories, feel like from 5 centuries ago
Genuine question, what is it that the JS implementation or DOM or anything the in the browser can do to permit desired modal popover content like dropdown menus and tooltips and floating nav bars while somehow preventing dickovers?
Like I have said, in a browser there should not exist truly modal windows.
The cases when modal windows are used abusively are far more numerous than the cases when they are useful.
Perhaps there should be a way to warn the user when moving the focus from a window that is supposed to be modal, but if the user insists it should be possible to disregard that a window is intended to be modal.
Also, it should be possible for the user to move any window as desired. It should not have been possible for windows to move on their own and to prevent the user from moving them. A script should also not be able to move the mouse cursor or any other kind of cursor.
A browser must always treat a script as potentially hostile, so all these facilities that can be used by a script to mess with the browser GUI should never have existed.
This is usually framed in terms of greedy corporations cynically exploiting young workers, but having interviewed for a Sony studio myself a few years ago (and ultimately going back to my native robotics field for almost exactly double the pay), I think there is something tangible about the compensation that is working on something normal people encounter, especially in the leisure spaces of their lives.
It may not pay the rent or put food on the table, but seeing your name in the credits of a movie your friends watched or a game they played is a perk that has real value. Writing a technical book rarely pays the bills either but it's the same story of getting to see your name on the shelf, and maaaybe it leads to getting on a conference panel or something at some point but really you're doing a lot of labour for far below minimum wage just to be able to say you did (as I did for Apress when I was 20 years old... and it landed me an internship at Google, so there you go).
> friends watched or a game they played is a perk that has real value
in most cases it don't unless this game become really legendary which often not the case. So young person easily can spent 10y in attempt to do that but as result non of those games will be remembered in 2y after release.
The sneaky thing you don't realize when you’re 20 is that you come to be interested in what you work on. So if you just try and do what you do well, it will become interesting!
I feel both sides of this. I'm almost 40 and for me it comes in waves. I dumped like 100 hours into ARC Raiders over the past few months and had a great time with it, and before that I've loved obsessing over single player adventures like Spider-Man and RDR2, as well as indie darlings like the Hollow Knight games.
But there are always gaps in there where I don't feel as drawn into it. Right now I try to get in a few rounds of Deep Rock Galactic every week with my twelve year old, and that hits the right things as far as having some progression for us to chase together while still being time-boxed to clear rounds and not having a huge survival/base-building component to it like Minecraft or Valheim or Don't Starve Together.
Basically... I expect this pattern will remain for the remainder of my adult life. I'm not going to retire and suddenly be like "ah yes now I will revisit six decades of forgotten gems sitting in my backlog" but I'm also not going to completely walk away from it. Rather certain things will grab me and I'll obsess over them for a bit, and then I'll take a break to work on a coding project or build something with my hands, or putter around the garden, or whatever else it is.
I love this technically, but part of the magic was all setting up trestle tables, sitting in someone’s garage / outbuilding, and it all being a bit raw.
I vividly remember cutting a hole in the side of a Shuttle XPC case to fit the fan of a GPU someone had bought over for me at one. That was all part of the experience for me.
I'm torn on this issue as well. I have fond memories of the janky setups, but also it is nice to actually have time to play games at the party. At some LANs, I've spent hours and hours just trying to get everyone in the game and playing. Plus with a setup like his you don't have to worry about finding older games that will run on the lowest common denominator hardware that people bring.
As you said though, there was a certain magic those days...
Yeah a few of us who used to LAN together picked up on this article independently. We all came to the conclusion most of us are on Macs now, and GFN seemed like the path of least resistance.
He touches on this on the website and I agree with his statement
> I do feel a lot of nostalgia for the days of trying to pack four people, four computers, and four monitors into one car on the way to a friends' LAN party, setting up machines on haphazardly arranged card tables with questionable seating arrangements, daisy-chaining power strips and network hubs. I'm a little less nostalgic for the experience of trying to copy game files over the network to get everyone on the same version, or pitying the one friend who inevitably has to reinstall Windows and doesn't manage to get in-game until after midnight. [...] Even the most enthusiastic of us didn't really want to do all that more than, like, 3-4 times a year, and a lot of people—even those who like games—really don't care to do it at all. I'm not even sure if I could do it anymore, as a 40-something with two kids!
Yeah a few of us who used to LAN together picked up on this article independently. We all came to the conclusion most of us are on Macs now, and GFN seemed like the path of least resistance.
Many many years ago I wrote a book for Apress, and the style guide for that instilled in me a lot of practices that now make my writing feel LLM-ish to some readers:
- Use bulleted lists, but always introduce and conclude a list with prose; a list can't immediately follow a heading or end a section.
- Use a mix of long and short sentences; in long sentences with parentheticals, use a mix of commas, parens, semicolons, and em dashes.
- With multiple continuous blocks of prose that aren't naturally broken up by an illustration or heading, start a paragraph with an inline bold statement to help anchor the reader.
Despite the cynical sibling reply, I also feel like there's real value here. Contrary to the meme, I don't think Claude just tells me I'm brilliant, but really does push back on directions that are unproductive, helps identify when a part is overcomplicated or a dependency has become redundant, etc. Those are important things to have at least a sightline on before getting too deep into the code, even (or maybe especially) in a world where an awful lot of code can be created basically for free.
I'm usually the one spotting redundancies and dead branches in Claude's code, not the other way around. But I think either way, what's important is questioning the process and understanding the way the code is working so that you retain a full mental model.
Part of the point of types is enforcing more of the contract at various code boundaries (function, module, etc), and that enforcement is specifically so that you don't have to keep the whole codebase in your head / context window in order to be able to work on it.
reply