But the master knowing when to break the rules because of tacit knowledge without being able to explain it is a real effect

This is one of the worst arguments against young earth creationism. You have to posit a being who can create the universe, but can't create already decayed elements.

The problem is that output sometimes take longer to verify than to create in the first place.

That turns AI into a deeply negative ROI system for many applications.

As someone who has optimized by reducing/batching heap allocations, 2x seems within the realm of possibility, depending on the exact circumstances.

That being said, iirc, node also has more hooks for things like observability than bun does, which might hurt it here

The difference is always having one or two devs who care. Every successful software project I've ever seen has had a few devs who care way more than is healthy

Exactly. If they all submit to federal warrants, and the state has a law effectively against that, then it becomes illegal to use the cameras.

The obvious story seems to be that OpenAI was reckless and got way ahead of their revenue assuming it would keep hockey-sticking

This doesn't tell me anything. Two devs who cared and didn't have a bunch of pointless meetings could already, and regularly did, scoop the big tech teams.

There were always 2 ways to complete a ticket. One that did what the stakeholder wanted, and one that does what the ticket says.

But devs that care about the product and what the stakeholders need are rare, and finding one of them was already a significant bottleneck on most projects.

AI might be an accelerator, but we've yet to see if it's optimizing the part that was actually the bottleneck yet.

Every time one of these articles come up, you can recognize that silicon valley is treating these people badly, but you should remember that everyone else is treating them worse

> If anything they seem to support homogenization of intellectual capacity/mental health in Eurasia since 2kya.

I would be interested in how you came to that conclusion, unless I'm misleading your post and you specifically mean West Eurasia

> We finally observed signals of selection for combinations of alleles that today are associated with three correlated behavioural traits: scores on intelligence tests (increasing γ = 0.74 ± 0.12), household income (increasing γ = 1.12 ± 0.12) and years of schooling (increasing γ = 0.63 ± 0.13). These signals are all highly polygenic, and we have to drop 449–1,056 loci for the signals to become non-significant (Extended Data Fig. 10). The signals are largely driven by selection before approximately 2,000 years )*, after which γ tends towards zero

Presumably pressure in different regions lead to different combinations of those alleles, which I think they are shorthanding a bit, but the fact that those alleles exist makes blank slate theory a kind of rough assumption

There's often a checklist of features management has, and meeting that list gets you in the door, but the features often never get used

The edit in the article says ~1.5kb

Why shouldn't it look like that? Especially with a law this dumb

There's a large, stable entity that management can sue if something goes very wrong.

A function or a keyword would interrupt that and make it less tempting