I love "Zero to Production in Rust", but that's a pretty long book that recreates a fraction of what comes out of the box with Django. Also, when things come with Django, there's no need to maintain or worry about subtle yet crucial bugs.

- swear words

- slurs

- speech enabling political organising

…which is not a matter of "upset".

It's entirely mad to me that I can make a list of easily verifiable, massively important examples of democratic processes in this country in the last few years and someone would just come up with a hypothetical like "but what if King kills someone" like it's somehow not just equal but has more weight than the list. Mad

The result is substantially more democratic, as per the list above.

In this country, the government with a vast majority couldn't even withdraw a small cash payment from better off pensioners without a rebellion from their own MPs.

Those generalising takes are entirely disconnected from the political reality of the UK outside of twitter.

I invite you to consider the rest of the points, too.

The ruling party has changed just two years ago. Hardly China, is it

If it's the former, then indeed the US has more of it.

If it's the latter, the UK has three new major parties with very different policies that openly and vocally oppose Labour, Conservatives, and Libdems. Mainstream media regularly broadcasts their views. I might strongly disagree with those views, but these parties are clearly freely operating political organisations. How is the US doing with viable non-Dem and non-Republican parties?

I won't comment on your Crown conspiracy theories.

The point still stands though. A populist PM who did a tiny bit of mismanagement and corruption (relative to his current peer in the US) was forced to resign. Trump isn't.

- We just changed our PM, despite his party having a historic majority.

- Parliament routinely rebels against the government, and backbenchers have a lot of say about the business of government.

- We have a number of upstart parties; they might be populist, but at least it's not a two-party-forever system.

- We had a coalition government just a few years ago.

- We changed our constitution a few months ago (abolishing hereditary peers) and it was just another news among many.

- We ejected one of the previous PMs for having a party during a lockdown, with a massive scandal before that when the PM accepted a gift of some wallpaper.

Compare and contrast to the ossified and corrupt American system, where the president is openly enriching himself and his family and friends, and there's nothing threatening the presidency. The last amendment was passed half a century ago, and there's zero hope for reform.

Democracy is a living, breathing system of government, not a number of checkboxes like "can I shoot a gun for fun" or "can I call someone N-word online". It's important to see the forest for the trees.

Claude is just comically bad nowadays.

* Consider leaving a comment about the hard-coded Vercel target. It's not clear where does it come from.

* [This is just a bullshit point, because the domain is not "added to" Vercel, it's provided by Vercel]

* Are you sure that [CENSORED] is prod-only? The name suggests otherwise. [also, what "if you're reviewing this rather than just reading it" even means?]

> The Vercel target is hard-coded. That's common and not wrong, but it's opaque; nobody reading this later will know which Vercel project it belongs to, and if the project is recreated the target changes silently. A comment or a named variable would help.

> Pointing a DNS name at Vercel is only half the job. The domain also has to be added to the project in Vercel's dashboard, otherwise requests will arrive and Vercel will reject them. That step lives outside this code, so it's easy to forget.

> Finally, [CENSORED] existing only in production is slightly odd on the face of it. It may be perfectly deliberate (perhaps a single shared testing tool that only needs one public address), but if you're reviewing this rather than just reading it, that's worth confirming.

It has the same annoying cadence and writing style with slightly less prominent claudisms.

If you even review PRs still: when was the last time you didn't just skip over tests? And if you ever looked at tests in an LLM-heavy PR, how many of those tests tested something useful, and not just built-ins and trivial behaviours?

There's at least some awareness in the industry of how LLMs generate a lot of boilerplate in business logic. It feels like we're much less aware of how much of it is in tests.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49671237

Points: 80

# Comments: 60

Sadly, agents don't mind generating gigatons of code instead of refactoring the abstractions.