I agree that it's worth reading the original source and encourage all to do so. My takeaway however was that the majority had a much stronger body of evidence than the dissenters.

Many of us work on Java monoliths that started in the 2000s when it was in vogue and we still have to keep them chugging along on Java 8. Personally I'm familiar with all the new features that have come out in the last few years, but for my actual work, java is literally stuck in the past.

In this sense, Java is already the next Cobol. I usually ask one or two questions about class loading in interviews (of senior Java devs), the younger ones are frequently stumbling upon these, and they don't even understand why I'm asking this. Good old Tomcat days, when you could run out of PermGenSpace if you weren't careful :)

Good news is, Oracle extended extended extended support for Java 8 will not last forever, and eventually - if you work in a regulated industry - the company WILL have to pull the trigger.

On the other hand, "where there is muck, there is brass", so a little bit of legacy can be beneficial for some.

> we still have to keep them chugging along on Java 8

There's something else amiss here. Compared to other platforms, upgrading Java, even on complex codebases, has never been a nightmare for me.

The problem in a large codebase is keeping consistency when upgrading.

I upgraded a codebase of approx 100 kloc from Java 7 to Java 8 a couple of years ago. As I didn't want mixed patterns for the same thing throughout the code base I replaced most of the loops with their streaming equivalent. I had the luxury of having the budget for doing so.

Mixing patterns of newer language features alongside older ones can make the code base hard to read.

Yeah, that would be a more nuanced take. The comments I'm indirectly referring to are people who are literally unaware of these features and talk confidently as if they do not exist.

Any reason why? My entire company is on 21-25. Except for one project that decided to use sun.internal.* classes.

Paying back tech debt, being able to keep up with treadmills (even slow and smooth ones) is depressingly rare.

whats keeping you from upgrading?

For those unfamiliar, this implies they would have been able to override a presidential veto, so the administration backtracking is just saving the president the embarassment of a defiant congress/disunified party.

When Trump vetoed a drinking water project for Colorado that had passed both the House and Senate by unanimous consent they failed to override it. Don’t underestimate how afraid Republicans in Congress are of angering Trump.

> Don’t underestimate how afraid Republicans in Congress are of angering Trump.

Or his armed insurrectionists^W supporters.

If the administration cares about embarrassment, I've got some bad news.

The administration cares about itself feeling embarrassment.

What it feels embarrassment about doesn't necessarily have much to do with what a normal healthy adult would feel embarrassment about.

Think of him like an emotionally damaged child.

Trump cares about winning, and appearing invincible, a lot. That’s why in close races, he only endorses near the end when he’s sure who’s going to win.

Right, the operative word is less "embarrassment" than "impotence".

So many close races, so many near misses.

I'm not sure most systems programmers would agree that a language with GC is suitable for their work.

"No syntactic sugar" and "no macros" sounds like a recipe for boilerplate that will be offputting for many.

Please consider adding some code samples to the front page of documentation, as syntax can be important to people.

I disagree with some other details, but I do think that a low level GC language that doesn't have some of Go's particular warts (particularly nil and error checking) is worth pursuing.

Writing the initial compiler in Typescript is an interesting choice but I suppose that won't matter after it's bootstrapped.

Ultimately it's hard for me to take the project seriously at such an early stage but I don't think it's fundamentally flawed. Good luck

Currently, this compiler is not at such an early stage. There’s no need to post any code samples on the website right now. If you’re willing to try the compiler, just dump the spec packaged with the release into the LLM and let the LLM write the code.

It seems like esp32 boards have taken over the pi's original market as developing for them has gotten easier while pis have gotten more expensive

These two products don't even have the same use case.

My understanding is that 50% of people in the state of Utah are mormon. I'm not saying there wasn't corruption, but it could very well be pure chance with those odds.

If cops are pulling over another person from Utah probably not a big deal but when dealing with an outsider from out of state the situation is different.

I can personally attest to this, along with many of my friends and family.

I've driven hundreds of extra miles per trip going around that damned state.

Hate to break it to you but the Mormon belt extends well up into Idaho (probably all the way to Montana on the East side) and down into Arizona, and diffuses out quite far from there. Probably need to go through Montana or skirt the Mexican border areas to avoid it, but border areas these days come with their own issues self created by our government...

I lived in Idaho Falls (well within the majority Mormon area that extends farther North at least to Rexburg) and never had an issue, but I definitely knew I was not part of the club.

Utah Mormons are of a different mindset, they're on home turf in their promised land and they act like it.

There's a Mormon that runs a local business in my area. One day he puts his business up for sale because he wants to move to Utah to get closer to his faith. Ends up moving back and reopening a couple of years later -- turns out he was Mormon, but not Mormon enough. They don't like outsiders, not even the Mormons from out of state, which kind of makes sense with being a historically polygamous group which expels the young men who aren't in the "in" group. Breeds a mindset of exclusivity.

Yeah the Mormons in Utah are of a much more vapid culture than those from out of state, I can say from experience. All of the out-of-stater Mormons I've met that were here for BYU and such, they all said they can't stand the people here. Don't blame them one bit.

Seems like a lot of entities are "quietly" doing things these days. The llm-ification of every piece of text on the internet is driving me crazy

Drives me crazy too, but headline writers/editors were addicted to "quietly" long before LLMs. Online journalism has been full of these types of tropes for ages.

It's not crazy, it's visionary!

It's not crazy --- it's visionary.

I hate it. I was on a history subreddit yesterday, reading a submission that was an AI generated history piece —- but seemed to be sourced entirely from a fictional hollywood movie

I only knew that because i saw the movie, but it’s a clear sign that the internet is going to shit for quality information

I thought at first when you said “fictional hollywood movie” that you were saying that not only were the details in the submission made up, but the movie that they got them from was also made up.

I wonder if this will mean a resurgence of encyclopedias or other authoritative digital records that are known to be verified.

Well, I suspect the non-LLM ones will become much more expensive than they are now due to the specialist knowledge they’d require to make combined with the smaller pool of people willing to pay for the difference

And the fact that LLMs are actively taking traffic away from them

As long as they're behind a wall that AI bots can't reach and suck all of the authoritative information out and then starve of visitors.

You're absolutely right! This is the smoking gun.

"Quietly" is not a new LLM-ism.

the trope is that they actually said the quiet part loudly

Even running a port scanner is enough to face disciplinary action at many US colleges. Taking down the network for the entire school for 15 minutes surely deserved more consequences than were doled out here. I'd encourage the author to focus their efforts and talents on something more constructive.

Excessive "consequences" don't encourage "better behavior," they incentivize more secrecy.

And eventually the knowledge gets out anyway and someone who doesn't care does more damage that's harder to clean up.

Why would they deserve “more consequences”? Academia isn’t the real world. It’s a place where people can learn how to interact with the world as an adult. People should be encouraged to experiment (within reason) and if there is no actual bad intent, consequences should focus on learning rather than punishment.

Maybe my net worth is too low but I just don't see a value proposition. I don't want daily emails from LLMs and if I need updates on my investments any more often than quarterly (at most), I should probably seek safer investments. I am a bit interested in budgeting tools, but I want them to be completely deterministic. For me at least, financial planning is pretty uneventful and time spent optimizing expenses more than I already have would be better spent seeking a higher paying job.

I use actualbudget.org to track all spending, but only update investment accounts ("off-budget" in Actual Budget terms) once a month. Completely deterministic, as all things related to numbers should be.

I have pointed my LLM at the SQLite DB and asked it to tell me what it could see from my last five years of transactions, and I was impressed with the things it picked up, and what it reminded me of, but I'm not sure I saw any value in the sense of anything I would change.

I'm going to have it review things monthly to see if that helps me, but I'm not sure it will. I'm generally already aware of how my finances are going because of my budget updates.

Have you tried Actual budget + SimpleFIN as a bridge to get your transactions out of banks?

I use that to track credit card spending and my checking account.

Then you can connect an mcp to do analysis of the data from one place if that’s what you want

Thanks. If I could ask, what would interest you?

They said deterministic budgeting tools.

Thanks :-)

There's many reasons why this piece wasn't made for me, so I don't want to begrudge anyone, but I wonder how much we can do to alieve this as a society by normalizing childlessness. I never wanted to have kids, but if I did, I doubt I would've been willing to endure what the author did for it. You can (and honestly I think most people should) live a long and fulfilling life without having kids. Myself and so many of my peers were raised in households that really were not good places for children. I'm of course grateful to exist and indebted to my mother for her countless sacrifices, but it pains me to think about how much happier she might have been if she didn't feel compelled to become a mother. I hope someday having children becomes the exception rather than the norm, because it doesn't feel like something that should be taken lightly. I hope that finding out you're infertile can be met with "Oh, okay. I guess I'll do something else then," the same way that folks with imperfect vision can't be pilots or astronauts and those with tremors can't be surgeons. I'm glad IVF is available for people who want to pursue it, I just want to live in a world where no one has kids "by default" without truly accepting the toll it will take.

Another quick thought - so long as we live in a world where children in need of adoption exist, I hope we can make adopting more normal too. If you're in a position to become a parent, why on Earth would adoption not be the default? It seems much better for everyone involved. The fixation on breeding and having children whose genetics perfectly match your own is strange and mildly alarming to me.

Although I agree with your sentiment, it should be remembered that the fixation on breeding is fundamentally baked into our psychology by evolution. We can argue against it logically, but we can't tell people to just stop feeling a certain way.

Adoption is incredibly, incredibly hard. Especially in Western countries, there are actually more people who want to adopt than there are kids to adopt. When you add in overseas adoption, it gets even harder and more expensive.

In short, adoption is incredibly expensive, stressful, and not a sure thing.

> hope someday having children becomes the exception rather than the norm, because it doesn't feel like something that should be taken lightly.

Doesn't this seem extremely selfish?

The fewer mothers there are, the more children each mother will have to give birth to.

If one in two women decide to become mothers, then each mother needs to have four children. If one in four become mothers, then it means each mother needs to give birth to eight children.

Since you are depending on those children to work for you during retirement, you're essentially leeching off other people's children.

No wonder mothers no longer think they are sacrificing themselves for their children, but rather for a capitalist machine that requires more bodies.

Your hope is deeply dysfunctional.

I'm confused. Your second to last paragraph implies an anti-capitalist stance, and yet the rest of your post reiterates capitalist propaganda. All of your “has to”s/“needs to”s fall under this. Needs to for what? For the grass to grow and the birds to sing? No, it's for the capitalist machinery to chug along.

You also talk about selfishness but at same time are implying that you want children to work so that you can have your cushy retirement. Our society should just stick together in solidarity; to paint this as “leeching” is also capitalist propaganda.