I would download it, but I wanted to be productive today.

Look I get people use the tools they use and perl is fine, i guess, it does its job, but if you use it you can safely expect to be mocked for prioritizing string operations or whatever perl offers over writing code anyone born after 1980 can read, let alone is willing to modify.

For such a social enterprise, open source orgs can be surprisingly daft when it comes to the social side of tool selection.

Would this tool be harder to write in python? Probably. Is it a smart idea to use it regardless? Absolutely. The aesthetics of perl are an absolute dumpster fire. Larry Wall deserves persecution for his crimes.

Maintaining software is hard, but this does not imply a right to be babied. People should simply lower their expectations of security to match reality. Vulnerabilities happen and only extremely rarely do they indicate personal flaws that should be held against the person who introduced it. But it's your job to fix them. Stop complaining.

> There have been a lot of bold promises (and genuine advances), but I don't see a world in the next 5 years where AI writes useful software by itself.

I actually think the opposite: that within five years, we will be seeing AI one-shot software, not because LLMs will experience some kind of revolution in auditing output, but because we will move the goalposts to ensure the rough spots of AI are massaged out. Is this cheating? Kind of, but any effort to do this will also ease humans accomplishing the same thing.

It's entirely possible, in other words, that LLMs will force engineers to be honest about the ease of tasks they ask developers to tackle, resulting in more easily composable software stacks.

I also believe that use of LLMs will force better naming of things. Much of the difficulty of complex projects comes from simply tracking the existence and status of all the moving parts and the wires that connect them. It wouldn't surprise me at all if LLMs struggle to manage without a clear shared ontology (that we naturally create and internalize ourselves).

It was half-baked when they shipped it and it still has the same launch bugs. Still, it's better than spotify.

Well that just seems broken.

Other interfaces at the time were just as bad if not worse.

Eh, the same complaints are the same as always. Expectations have improved, tho! I think that's what we're seeing here.

Yea and it's still a partially-parseable shit show with guessed values. But we can and could have and should have done better by simply defining a format to use.

My experience has indicated the exact opposite. CSVs are the only "structured" format nobody can claim to parse 100% (ok probably not true thinking about html etc, just take this as hyperbole.) Just use a well-specified format and save your brain-cells.

Occasionally, we must work with people who can only export to csv. This does not imply csv is a reasonable way to represent data compared to other options.

The only perceptual difference is that apple special-cases airpod management to ease switching of devices. They trash their own product by making such consumer-hostile ux obvious.

I just pray we are not stuck with current versions of bluetooth in perpetuity. What a nightmare.

Anyway, you can simply not run into stuff with a wire. There's nothing you can do about bluetooth glitching out randomly for five seconds. Not to mention playing the "what device is playing into my headphones" game. Wireless is for people who don't care.