OK, I'll stick with git.

I started using Meld years ago and continue to find people who've never heard of it. It's a pretty good tool.

> In contrast, LLMs in their current state have (for me) dramatically reduced the distance between an idea and a working implementation

It may have reduced the time to an implementation, based on my experiences I sincerely doubt the veracity of applying the adjective "working".

As a software developer over 30 years, AI is not a tool, it is not deterministic, it is an aide.

Don't have it do things for you. Have it do things with you.

It can't do things with me like a human, it's not human, it's not intelligent, it's not thinking, it's not aware. It's an aide I use, not a tool I rely on.

When I see the word "score", it reminds me of the CCP social scoring system.

Weird... when I see something done by US-Based capitalist and attributed to communists half a world away, it makes me think of the Powell Memo.

That is weird, the US didn't ask the CCP to invent social scoring.

I mean -also- weird to claim that the CCP invented scoring folks, but even if they did, it'd be hella weird to think that somehow they helped a US local power company implement it...

Look, I get that "CCP Bad". It's just always wild to see folks try and make that case when something has literally nothing to do with it, especially while there are plenty of pretty horrific and material mechanisms in play without pretending that the big-O Other is to blame.

> I think this is missing the reason why these APIs are designed like this: because they're convenient and intuitive

Agreed. In my view, the method the author figured out is far from intuitive for the general population, including me.

I guess the point is: How often do we really need actual angles in the code? Probably only at the very ends: input from users and output to users. Everywhere else, we should just be treating them as sin/cos pairs or dot/cross pairs. So when the user inputs an angle, immediately convert it to what the computer actually needs, store it that way throughout the computation, and then only if/when the user needs to see an actual angle would you need to convert it back.

This is how most physics/graphics engines work.

I avoid Kotlin as a principal, any language that can't get the type and variable name in the correct order; I avoid them completely.

> not machine code

Actually, computers, being machines, do equate machine code and source of truth.

> Yes, and the implementation... no one actually cares about that.

There has been a profession in place for many decades that specifically addresses that...Software Engineering.

Same for me, has been my whole life. I complain about it all the time. It's well documented that people can read black on light far better and with less eye strain than light on black; yet there seems to be a whole generation of developers determined to force us all to try and read it. Even the media sites like Netflix, Prime, etc. force it. At least Tubi's is somewhat more readable.

Sometimes a site will include a button or other UI element to choose a light theme but I find it odd that so many sites which are presumed to be designed by technically competent people, completely ignore accessibility concerns.

The most common mistake I see (on this website at least) is the assumption that one's programming competence is equal to their competence in other things.