Let me get this straight: you can be a defender of human rights, aligned with the country you live in, but if you fall in disgrace with the American government, _you can't even do transactions with your own country_.

So this is fundamentally flawed, and violates the fundamental rights of German citizens in Germany.

[1] https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/british-icc-chief-prosecutor-l...

What I don't understand is: ELSTER (taxes) already uses electronic signatures, don't these signature already fulfil the requirements of eIDAS? Why do we even need Google/Apple?

This is to show that there is more geopolitically than meets the eye.

If the answer is no, then we cannot be sure to use it as a high-level language. The whole purpose of a language is providing useful, concise constructs to avoid something not being specified (undefined behavior).

If we can't guarantee that the behavior of the language is going to be the same, it is no better than prompting someone some requirements and not checking what they are doing until the date of delivery.

This is something that could be distilled from some industries like aviation, where specification of software (requirements, architecture documents, etc.) is even more important that the software itself.

The problem is that natural language is in itself ambiguous, and people don't really grasp the importance of clear specification (how many times I have repeated to put units and tolerances to any limits they specify by requirements).

Another problem is: natural language doesn't have "defaults": if you don't specify something, is open to interpretation. And people _will_ interpret something instead of saying "yep I don't know this".

Most of it happens, as always, at the interface. So these methodologies help you manage these interfaces between people, machine and product.

Here, Rebble says Core is profiting from their work (hey, look at your licenses). It would be a direct violation of their ToS though, since there is this clause:

> 4. Services Usage Limits > > You agree not to reproduce, duplicate, copy, sell, resell or exploit any portion of the Service, use of the Service, access to the Service, or Content accessed through use of the Service, without Rebble’s express written permission.

So I don't know what to think honestly, I don't see any bad actors here...

For that you need regulation that enforces it. On a global scale it is pretty difficult, since it's a country-by-country thing... If you say e.g. for customers in the US, then US Congress needs to pass legislation on that. Trend is however to install backdoors everywhere, so good luck with that.

Of course, golden rules are 1. write the tests yourself, don't let the LLM write them for you and 2. don't paste this code directly on the LLM prompt and let it generate code for you.

In the end it boils down to specification: the prompt captures the loosely-defined specification of what you want, LLM spouts something already very similar to what you want, tweak it, test it, off you go.

With test driven development this process can be made simpler, and other changes in other parts of the code are also checked.

It is free, yes, but there is no need to either abuse it or give as much resource for free as they can.

I have been looking at high-end laptops with dedicated AMD Graphics chip, but can't find many... So I will probably go with AMD+NVidia with MUX switch, let's see how it goes... Unless someone else has other suggestions?

Yes, I know Real Solar System is a thing, but still :D

Also, tons of CAE platforms have Python bindings, so you are "forced" to work on Python. Sometimes the solution is not just "abandoning a language".

If it fits your purpose, knock yourself out, for others that may be reading: uv is great for Python dependency management on development, I still have to test it for deployment :)

You can however get all stability of a released version with newer packages if you use stable+backports. This would give you a stable system, and allow you to upgrade selected packages to newer versions. This can be tedious, so running testing is also possible.

And well, overall, you can also install other distributions that are bleeding-edge (Arch based?). That's why I like about the distro ecosystem :)

https://backports.debian.org/Instructions/

If I'm not mistaken, repo is already included by default, so you just need:

''' # apt install -t trixie-backports '''

This will install backported package _and_ dependencies, so you will be good to go :)

For other countries... Well you get what you vote I guess.