Additionally, patentable materials must be novel, useful, and a non-obvious inventive step. - Wikipedia

What does the patent contain? Where is the non-obvious inventive step? Using an AI to impersonate someone doesn’t strike me as novel, inventive, or surprising.

From The Software Quality and Productivity Crisis Executives Won’t Address (via on Lemmy)

Executives aren’t ignorant. They have the data. They commission the surveys. They attend the conferences where CTOs present their concerns. They know that:

• 91% of CTOs cite technical debt as the biggest challenge
• 75% of projects are expected to fail
• 69% of developers lose significant time to inefficiencies
• Only 39% of projects meet success criteria
• The recommended 15–20% investment in technical debt management yields better long-term returns than crisis spending

Yet they choose:

• Not to allocate recommended budgets for technical debt management
• Not to make quality a strategic priority despite CTOs’ and developers’ concerns
• Not to mention these challenges in public communications to shareholders
• To celebrate AI productivity gains whilst developers report record inefficiency
• To focus on the next hype cycle (AI) rather than address fundamental problems

This isn’t a failure of knowledge. It looks to me like a failure of courage and integrity. A failure of the very concept of leadership.

If it’s only vibe coding, going by vibe, being an expert makes no difference.

If you go for thorough reviews and corrections, supposed code generation efficiency gains are typically offset by review and correction effort.

function GetRandomNumber(): return 42;

It’s a random number, what more do you want 🤷‍♂️ /s

An LLM wouldn’t have made that mistake. /s

Prompt: On line 23, between the words fn and close, write void.

So, between a copper wire, a banana, and wet mud, the mid-level stuff is the banana, right?

I’ll go for that, then.

It always feels great seeing Mumble mentioned, especially with such a positive sentiment. I was a core dev, or am but have been mostly inactive for a long time now.

Discord with millions in funding and a dev team - Mumble with contributors you can count on one hand obviously can’t keep up. If a community wants text messaging, that’s just not Mumble’s target of primarily voice communication. Whether that’s because of limited resources/people or a deliberate target scoping.

My clan briefly switched from Mumble to Teamspeak for a while. I was happy to see that the majority preferred Mumble and we moved back to Mumble back then. That was still before Discord was a thing.

I assume it was a subset of languages. Only EN is much smaller than full with all languages.

“What President Trump is trying to do is to balance and shift the burden of Europe’s security to European allies, instead of to American taxpayers, plumbers and hard-working people in my home state of Iowa and other states,”

After the first half I would have commented “coping or lying”, but with the second half - yeah, they’re definitely lying. It’s their default, their standard lying. Publicly saying one thing, and doing entirely unrelated or opposite things.

This should always be called and labelled what it is. Not strange remarks, irritations, or whatever. Manipulative, oppressive lies, manipulation, propaganda. Their lying and doublespeak is just like Putin. And in terms of actions, we must not expect anything else, no more trustworthiness or reliability.

I think they’d be great for distraction and irritation, but at the same time, they’re not as god for signaling and alarming, and, I would imagine, would desensitize us to human screams.

Pride makes you part of the system. Gatefulness puts you outside of it. It may seem pointless to weigh between the two terms, but surely it is sourced from mindset and influences the mindset.

We don’t control or significantly influence the system individually. Still, it’s important to take ownership and control, even if it’s only in the very small, even if it’s just being a good citizen, even if it’s just being friendly or supportive of other people. Especially for a diverse, collaborative, and democratic system like Europe it’s important we see ourselves not as passive receivers but as active parts.

Being a part of the system is enough to be proud as long as you’re not actively working on destroying it. Even if it’s small, even if it’s just being friendly to others, participating is upholding.

If we don’t see ourselves as active parts of the system, others will influence and change it. The biggest risk is those who have the motivation and capability (be it position, influence, or money) will erode it.

Our biggest strength now is predictability and safety through social, political, and justice systems. Diverse collaboration on fair and safe ground has competitive and collective gain advantages.

Our biggest systematic risks on these unique advantages are deteriorating social systems (including the distribution of wealth) and attacks on basic rights and protections, as well as systematic inertness.

China can compete in many things, especially scale and production. But can it hold onto stability and innovation after tech has been stolen, corruption and nepotism are systemic issues, and bubbles like their real estate construction or pandemic handling are over? How well off will the average citizen be, materially, mentally, socially, and deterministically safe?

Regarding “above fair price” - the problem is currency and labor cost discrepancies. Europe can’t match low income production on price. I don’t know if that was your point, but “fair price” is different depending on the source and depending on which side of the provider and buyer you view from. If you were addressing systematic costs that should be lowered, then I don’t see that from the statement.

A lot depends on the economy, but if Europe can stand its ground and transform into a self-sufficient union, it’s not missing anything that would prevent keeping its strength and collective citizen upsides/goodness. Europe doesn’t have to produce the cheapest goods or be able to export as successfully if it shifts its economic system and political goals.

Does it work for people with first name Al?

forgetting to redact credentials that made it possible for all of Reddit to log into Epstein’s account and trample over all the evidence

/o\ 🤦

It was physical books?

It’s insane to me that you claim it doesn’t allow internal corruption when China is a very corrupt system.

There may be good systematic economy foundations, I can’t speak much about those, but if they’re not applied to everyone and just then it’s besides the point.

This would be a great cause for universities and students for pushing political reforms. Hindering education and development are good catchers for politics.

Honestly it’s good engineering practice to not be stuck in your own product.

You want them to be using only copilot?