“ There does not seem to be anything in principle preventing the methods from extending all the way to Navier-Stokes, and there is even a non-negligible chance that the forcing term could be eliminated entirely, although there are an enormous number of technical difficulties that would ensue in implementing that program. At this point, I would not be surprised if one could batter out such an extension by pouring an enormous amount of compute and AI assistance at such a task…”

Just vaccinate yourself and your kids and listen to the advice of real doctors.

What happens if/when we don’t deliver?

But let's not make some bullshit up about a million dollars wasted on some non-sense, when we have real problems with the DoW, which can't even audit itself, sucking up almost a trillion dollars.

And they stole 80 of them? So basically a truckload? Sure.

Be an artist on your time, not mine.

> I learned that my style is somehow "bad."

That’s what you are missing: your style is not bad at all. It’s just your style. Use it for yourself!

Teams work on shared ground. Automatic formatting is just part of that shared ground.

By the way, you have the exact energy of someone who would argue about code style: a prima donna who quotes Emerson when confronted with disagreement.

I find that people who argue against automatic linting and formatting tend to be the same that would argue incessantly about style. So much wasted energy, I want none of that.

Also, in your example above, if you put the comment on the line _above_ instead of inline the formatter will most likely do the right thing.

It’s frustrating because I often come to HN for the smart contrarian takes. But now I have to search really hard to find the opposite.

So yes, we all want fair, but what we think of as fair can be wildly different.

The truth is that it is a hell of a lot easier to lower the bar for everyone than to raise it. I.e. it's a lot easier to make dumb kids than to make smart ones, so in the name of equity we shall have dumber ones.