No, it will likely be a state actor who reaches it first, who will never give away such a capability so easily

No, and even if we could, it would require a migration of approaching the same difficulty of a migration to PQ, at which point why not just migrate to PQ

I've read the entire page and still don't know whether or not I can import Go modules in this language, which seems rather important

The first example suggests yes.

Really? Almost every example imports something from Go, and it states "interoperability with the Go ecosystem" (or similar, from memory).

That isn’t the same thing. Indeed, upon reading further, it appears there is no way to import non-stdlib go modules.

Support for Go third-party packages is not part of this first release, but the tooling to generate bindings for Go packages (which enables imports from the Go stdlib) is already in place[1]. Extending it to support third-party packages is on the roadmap.

[1] https://github.com/ivov/lisette/blob/main/tools/bindgen/READ...

I think this article is largely, or at least directionally, correct.

I'd draw a comparison to high-level languages and language frameworks. Yes, 99% of the time, if I'm building a web frontend, I can live in React world and not think about anything that is going on under the hood. But, there is 1% of the time where something goes wrong, and I need to understand what is happening underneath the abstraction.

Similarly, I now produce 99% of my code using an agent. However, I still feel the need to thoroughly understand the code, in order to be able to catch the 1% of cases where it introduces a bug or does something suboptimally.

It's possible that in future, LLMs will get _so_ good that I don't feel the need to do this, in the same way that I don't think about the transistors my code is ultimately running on. When doing straightforward coding tasks, I think they're already there, but I think they aren't quite at that point when it comes to large distributed systems.

> LLMs will get _so_ good that I don't feel the need to do this, in the same way that I don't think about the transistors my code is ultimately running on.

The problem is, they're nothing like transistors, and never will be. Those are simple. Work or don't, consistently, in an obvious, or easily testable, way.

LLM are more akin to biological things. Complex. Not well understood. Unpredictable behavior. To be safely useful, they need something like a lion tamer, except every individual LLM is its own unique species.

I like working on computers because it minimizes the amount of biological-like things I have to work with.

I suppose transistors is a bad example.

Perhaps a better analogy would be the Linux kernel. It's built by biological humans, and fallible ones at that. And yet, I don't feel the need to learn the intricacies of kernel internals, because it's reliable enough that it's essentially never the kernel's fault when my code doesn't work.

Kernel is a bad analogy, if you understand how it behaves you can understand how its built. LLMs don't have that, their behaviour is not completely defined by how they are built.

Every abstraction is leaky, its not like I have 1 in every 100 tickets I work on needs understanding of the existence of filesystem buffers, it's in the back of my mind, it's always there. I didn't read linux kernel source, but I know it's existence. LLM output doesn't have that.

So we already have this problem and things are "fine"?

In my personal experience, the rate at which Claude Code produces suboptimal Rust is way higher than 1%.

That is dependent upon the quality of the AI. The argument is not about the quality of the components but the method used.

It's trivial to say using an inadequate tool will have an inadequate result.

It's only an interesting claim to make if you are saying that there is no obtainable quality of the tool that can produce an adequate result (In this argument, the adequate result in question is a developer with an understanding of what they produce)

Maybe you should vote with your feet and work somewhere that isn’t like this.

Everyone's circumstances are different right? It's not always so simple.

Big tech was a bit of an experiment for me in my 40s, I always worked at small/med size companies before. I think it was worth it (for the learnings and comp). I get a lot more choices in the future when I'm financially secure.

All of this guy’s takes are so funny to me. He’s clearly been forged in the fire of utterly cursed and corrupt companies like Amazon, and it bleeds into his entire world view. He can’t even conceive of the idea of actually wanting to create a good product, it’s all seen through the lens of promotions and self-furtherment.

I think it's only a matter of time at this point before a devastating supply chain attack occurs.

Supply-chain security is such a dumpster fire, and threat actors are realising that they can use LLMs to organize such attacks.

Not sure what you mean by devastating, but supply chain attacks occur pretty much daily worldwide and LLMs have been used by attackers since multiple years at that point. Defending against supply chain threats is a pretty hard area to iterate and things are slow to change. For example pypi only supports trusted publishers since 2023 IIRC, and lots of large companies are still not consistently using that option

In Europe is illegal to capture and publish ATC. I don't understand why. Anyway I do not know what are you comparing.

From pilot friends, in best case I would say a big “depends” in some countries are very unprofessional, in others very professional (anyway total unfair generalization). There were already accidents because of that, for example because the twr communicated with locals in non english, so not everybody was at the same page.

> It also helps me keep my job during layoffs because I can assure you the managers have noticed.

I got to this bit before realising this is satire

I have no faith that this is satire since America is full of people who underestimate the impact of luck and privilege in the course of their life in favor of a view that everything is due to their own personal efforts and the suffering of others is obviously due to their personal defects. These people will relentlessly defend any actions by the owner class without realizing that they themselves are not in that class and never will be. They say things like this a lot.

And the Oscar for most mealy-mouthed post of the year goes to…

We generally try to avoid corporate press releases for that reason, but is there a good third-party post to replace it with?

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...