Technology
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
And most devs I know use it everyday, so... 🤷
Especially for repetitive mundane code, like they said. It's much faster to check code for correctness than it is to write it in the first place.
"I need to restructure this directory tree. If a file has "index" in the name, then it has to go in a parallel directory structure starting at "/home/repos/project/indexes/" and remove the word "index" from the name. Use the same child folders as the original."
There, I just finished a custom Python script to accomplish that. Can I do it myself? Yes. Can I do it in 30 seconds? No. Why would I waste my time writing such a mundane script for a one-off thing? And it can do so much more.
In certain circumstances sure, but at any level of complexity, not so much.
At some point it becomes less about code correctness and more about logical correctness, which requires contextual domain understanding.
Want to churn out directory changing python scripts, go nuts.
Want to add business logic that isn't a single discrete change to an existing system, less likely.
For small things is works OK, it's less useful the more complex the task.
Perhaps for the the style or complexity of the code you (and i) are seeing on a regular basis this is true.
I find, for low logical complexity code, it's less about the difficulty of reading it and more about the speed.
I can read significantly quicker than i can type and if the code isn't something i need additional time to reason about then spotting issue with existing code can be quicker than me writing the same code out.
Boilerplate code is a good example of this.
Though, as i said, I've found the point at which that loses it's reliable usefulness is relatively low in the complexity scale.
The specific issue i have with people pushing LLM's as a panacea for boilerplate code is that it's not declarative and is prone to reasonable looking hallucinations , given enough space.
Even boilerplate in large enough amount can be subject to eccentricities of LLM imagination.
It was just a contrived example for the purpose of the comment, and I admit it wasn't a good one.
How about turning a directory tree of dozens of .url files (Windows web shortcut files) into an HTML file? Directory names as section headings, and nested bulleted lists of hrefs using the .url file names as the link text, minus the ".url". Can you do that on the CLI? Sure, but it would be a hell of a hack. It would be a disgusting blob of awk code, probably. You're much better off writing it in something like Python.
It's not hard stuff. It's simple directory recursion, string building, and file writing. It's just so mind-numbingly boring to write, and it takes time. Instead, Copilot made that for me in 10 seconds. As fast as I could articulate the need in text. No debugging needed. Worked the first time. All I had to ask for in a second pass was more indenting of each nested list, and I could have just added that myself.
It's funny that you're not even sure you can do that extremely simple thing in my original comment faster than I could prompt an LLM. And your prejudice is showing by assuming I had to even debug it, or that the code was slop. The code looked great. It was perfect Python.
I wish all of you people would stop knocking what you've never even tried. Because it just makes you sound bigoted, using words like "slop" and making assumptions about the quality of the output while never having tried it yourself. Prejudice is never a good thing.
I've written a fair amount of advanced command line stuff using grep and sed and whatever else. Anything non-trivial takes just as much debugging as Python code, and it's harder to read and debug. And when it's boring, one-off code, why would you even want to do it yourself?
I'll never understand the LLM hate on lemmy. Feel free to hate on capitalism, or on using fossil fuels to power LLMs, or on having no social safety net when LLMs displace jobs, or any number of other things, but to be prejudiced and assume it's always slop when you've never even tried it just makes no sense to me. (Maybe you have, but I'm certain most of the haters haven't.) It's a revolutionary tool in its infancy, and it's already very useful on certain tasks.
That's a bold and premature statement IMO, how many AI winters have there been before this one ?
I'm not even saying you're wrong, but to assert it with such confidence sounds like crypto bro-nanigans.
i would argue that it's evolutionary rather than revolutionary, but that's subjective i suppose.
Speaking for me personally i don't hate LLM's, i dislike the confidence with which they are being pushed and the lack of acknowledgement of their very real and IMO very important limitations.
You get statements like
Without context, and that feeds into the general propaganda feel of the sentiment, because people who don't actually use them or don't understand the implied context hear "LLM's can do all the things, all the professional devs are using it all day".
I understand it's not on you to police peoples impressions, but trying to add actual context to those statements isn't hate, it's prudence.
Then again, that's subjective too.
Now re-explain this 5 more times before it shits out something remotely close to what you're asking it to do.
That hasn't been my experience for something this simple. Not at all. I vibe coded a 75 line Python script the other day and it worked perfectly the first try.
"every day", if you mean 'daily'.