Well that's embarrassing! I reported it as if it wasn't a joke. I thought the joke issue was this one about translating everything to Chinese: https://github.com/tldraw/tldraw/issues/8092
If it was a joke (the test suite issue), then it was a really shit joke. It reads more like backtracking, I don't think _you_ should feel any embarrassment.
I've played with all of these various formatters/linters in my workflow. I tend to save often and then have them format my code as I type.
I hate to say it, but biome just works better for me. I found the ox stuff to do weird things to my code when it was in weird edge case states as I was writing it. I'd move something around partially correct, hit save to format it and then it would make everything weird. biome isn't perfect, but has fewer of those issues. I suspect that it is hard to even test for this because it is mostly unintended side effects.
ultracite makes it easy to try these projects out and switch between them.
sure, but biome just works today... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯... i don't understand why we need 10 (or even 2) different rust based formatters... people need to just work together a bit more imho.
That's _very_ unlikely. The AI craze cured me from my imposter syndrome. Since I only saw marginal gains (~20% increase in velocity on average, if we don't count the increased in PR reviews and production bugfixes), I participated to a few 'AI is the new stuff' presentation with 'ai professionals' that presented my already existing workflow (still improved it a bit, but not much). However, listening to them, I found out that they just aren't very good devs and work on rather easy subjects.
I am sorry that your experience has been so poor. Mine is the complete opposite. I am sure there is a workable middle ground.
I don’t believe that AI will suddenly make a bad engineer into a good engineer. You still need to put the time in and have the skillset. It is the hammer and nail, not the finished house.
Oh and 20% sounds amazing actually. Remember that this is the worst it will be today. The rate of improvement over the last year alone has been phenomenal given that we went from nearly 0 to +20.
The way I look at it, from a quality perspective, this is the worst it will be. I certainly won't ever go back to coding without AI. If you extrapolate from there and the general need for tokens compounding with the demand, it is only upwards, whether you agree with it or not.
We can debate endlessly whether the horse and buggy is better than the car, or the cell phone will replace the film camera. But at the end of the day, history has shown that none of that matters. We're better off just agreeing to it and working to improve it.
We can debate whether conventional weapons are better than nuclear weapons or not. But none of that matters. We’re better off just agreeing to it and working to improve it…
The problem with your analogies are that there is no path where a constant improvement to cars leads to anything but better outcomes for human.
There is no realistic or likely path where improvements to cellphones leads to anything but better outcomes for humans.
However, if AI keeps getting better to the extent we can imagine, ie Super Intelligence, the outcomes are more likely to be extinction level negative than positive.
I have a much more positive outlook on humanity and I don't share the same doomsday scenario. For me, I made the conscious decision to turn off the news after covid. Something obviously flipped in that period where the negativity just compounded, and it just feeds into itself. I watch my own family sucked into the cycle of "what did trump do now!" kind of stuff and I found it really wasn't healthy for my own mental being. Ignorance is bliss.
Negativity exists outside of your own perception of it, or in your terms, ignorance is bliss.
You can always choose to believe things will be good, but after a certain point it stops being a belief and is moreso a mental illness that requires medication. When reality and your perception diverge too much, you can believe anything.
In the current economic systems, AGI would bring about mass starvation, war, and enslavement. We would require a complete destruction of capitalism to make AGI not the worst thing to happen to humanity since the black plague. Now, look at our leaders. How likely is that?
If you're happy because your perception of reality is very far off from reality, yes. That is psychosis. If I see myself in a mansion and I'm currently in a box under the freeway that is an hallucination.
You're conflating an emotion (happiness) with perception (living somewhere you don't live).
You certainly can give someone medication because they have a negative emotion, but you don't typically give them medication for positive emotions. Unless, it is affecting their life in a negative way.
> We can debate endlessly whether the horse and buggy is better than the car, or the cell phone will replace the film camera. But at the end of the day, history has shown that none of that matters. We're better off just agreeing to it and working to improve it.
I don't know why people keep pointing to history to argue adoption is inevitable. Isn't history is littered with no-code solutions that no one uses anymore?
I spent a year in high school with this at the top of the chalk board of my history class: "Those who don't study history are destined to repeat it"
The internet has been entwined in my life since 1991, when I got my first email. Before that it was BBS's. The context and parallels that I'm witnessing now very much align with what I've seen before over the last 35 years. I've bet on some history based predictions in this cycle that few else saw, that absolutely have come true.
This isn't a no-code solution, and not even close to that. It is very much of a more code than ever solution.
> You have big tech oligarchs salivating at the idea of moar profits by firing a bunch of people.
For big tech to start relying on vibe coding without code reviews etc is a huge risk.
Big tech has so much red tabe preventing people from getting stuff done. Security reviews needed, etc. This inertia will hold back even a super intelligence from getting stuff done.
Some nerds in a garage trying to apply vibe coding to a problem won't have this red tape.
Red tape is necessary in big orgs because you can't have 100k people running around shipping new half broken, semi supported software with security holes. So you established release processes, approvals, code reviews, etc.
All I'm saying is: big tech is also at risk of being disrupted by AI.
> you cant rely on the thing that produced invalid output to validate it's own output
I've been coding an app with the help of AI. At first it created some pretty awful unit tests and then over time, as more tests were created, it got better and better at creating tests. What I noticed was that AI would use the context from the tests to create valid output. When I'd find bugs it created, and have AI fix the bugs (with more tests), it would then do it the right way. So it actually was validating the invalid output because it could rely on other behaviors in the tests to find its own issues.
The project is now at the point that I've pretty much stopped writing the tests myself. I'm sure it isn't perfect, but it feels pretty comprehensive at 693 tests. Feel free to look at the code yourself [0].
I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying it's not sufficient on its own. I run my code through an LLM and it occasionally catches stuff I missed.
Thanks for the clarification. That's the difference though, I don't need it to catch stuff I missed, I catch stuff it misses and I tell it to add it, which it dutifully does.
"Sorry folks, this issue was more of a joke (am I allowed to do that?) but I'll keep the issue open since there's some discussion here."
reply