QED: oil powerful, only dollar buy oil, dollar stronger.

Those companies spending 1000+/developer are doing it with the same hope that at some point those $1000/month will replace the developer salary per month. Or because by doing so more investors will put more money into them.

Take away the promise of AI replacing developers and see how much a company is willing to pay for LLMs. It is not zero as there are very good cases for coding assisted by LLM or agentic engineering.

Because if the domain logic is getting more complex then more types will not catch the bugs unless you are willing for codify business rules within types so then you have to test the types.

Maybe someone who is working for them can confirm or add more details about it.

But on company level I see it as a risk: suddently you might have 50 new small apps created by people who might not even work at the company who are not constantly tested for security/privacy ... but more important who once done are not pushing the frontier of how a much better solution might be in that area cause nobody is putting time into them. So as time passes by this has the risk to become legacy software used to run your business. yes of course you can point an AI to all of them and prompt it to make them better but that means focus on that instead of your core business.

Maybe we will see solutions appearing to manage this kind of tech debt.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46886477

Points: 5

# Comments: 0

You of course say self reliance on essential resources and I still think for most countries that could be very expensive very fast. People are complaining about the high costs specifically of the essential products when their prices are raising. Without a serious rethinking of our society we cannot probably fix that. And nobody is willing now to vote and agree to suffer for a generation to fix this system.

https://notes.ghinda.com - short thoughts, ideas, code samples

So I think younger kids have purpose and associate meaning to a lot of things and they do try to get to a specific path toward an outcome.

Of course (depending on the age) their "reasoning" is in a different system than hours where the survival instincts are much more powerful than any custom defined outcome so most of the time that is the driving force of the meaning.

Why I talk about meaning? Because, of course, the kids cannot talk about the why, as that is very abstract. But meaning is a big part of the Why and it continues to be so in adult life it is just that the relation is reversed: we start talking about the why to get to a meaning.

I also think that kids starts to have more complex thoughts than the language very early. If you got through the "Why?" phase you might have noticed that when they ask "Why?" they could mean very different questions. But they don't know the words to describe it. Sometimes "Why?" means "Where?" sometimes means "How?" sometimes means "How long?" .... That series of questioning is, for me, a kind of proof that a lot of things are happening in kids brain much more than they can verbalise.

This is an interesting proposal. But for posterity I am going to critique the critique on the website about Sorbet:

Sorbet is Ruby and while it has a DSL that is no different than any other gem providing methods or objects to use. For example you can define a type and assign it to a Ruby constant. Because Sorbet is Ruby.

In general I would say any type system has its own syntax when you go deep into it and need more than this param has this simple primitive type and the method returns this simple primitive type. So you have to learn a DSL and the syntax of a type system.

1) Verify requirements => this can be done with formal verifications

2) Validate fit for purpose => this is where we make sure that if the customer needs addition it does not matter if our software does very well substraction and it has a valid proof of doing that according with specs.

I know this second part is kinda lost in the transition from oh my god waterfall is bad to yeyy now we can fire all testers because the quality is the responsibility of the entire team.

IF the government decides to use violence against you do you really have a chance with a gun? or 10?

1. Everything is an object and the main thinking is that you send messages to objects not call methods on objects. This is very important and the core of how the language works and moreso important when reading Ruby code.

2. `false` and `nil` are falsey. Everything else is truthy when used directly in conditionals. Eg: if variable will go on true-branch when variable is anything else than `false`/`nil`. Else it will go on the else-branch.

3. Start irb (the interactive console) and use