And yet, it still takes 5 minutes for my canvas preview to load, and one in 20 times it crashes the whole app.

More realistically I think you'd need something like "Now write your post in the style of a space pirate" with a 10 second deadline, and then have another LLM checking if the two posts cover the same topic/subject but are stylistically appropriate.

Is this meant to detract from their situation? These tech stacks are mainstream because so many use them... it's only natural that AI would be the best at writing code in contexts where it has the most available training data.

> These tech stacks are mainstream because so many use them

That's a tautology. No, those tech stacks are mainstream because it is easy to get something that looks OK up and running quickly. That's it. That's what makes a framework go mainstream: can you download it and get something pretty on the screen quickly? Long-term maintenance and clarity is absolutely not a strong selection force for what goes mainstream, and in fact can be an opposing force, since achieving long-term clarity comes with tradeoffs that hinder the feeling of "going fast and breaking things" within the first hour of hearing about the framework. A framework being popular means it has optimized for inexperienced developers feeling fast early, which is literally a slightly negative signal for its quality.

No, it's a clarification. There is massive difference between domains, and the parent post did not specify.

If the AI can only decently do JS and Python, then it can fully explain the observed disparity in opinion of its usefulness.

It's a hardware wallet that just looks cool. Where's the "black mirror vibes". There's not much nefarious tech here.

The ick and black mirror vibes comes from the technical fact that bitcoin is non fungible and publicly traceable by design making it a surveillance states dream.

Luckily there are superior alt coins that don't have that flaw.

Err, actually the ick factor for me was the crypto bro mentality and the general seedy nature of the state of crypto and those who use it.

Turns out if you only look at people trying to turn a profit you will find bad people. It's like complaining about investment being seedy because you only watch wallstreetbets.

That should be the point where the intellectual curious hacker should try to broaden there horizon beyond the superficial surface.

I don't see the seedy nature you try to apply to a whole industry if anything i experience the opposite.

Dosage makes the poison.

Fun video, you can really feel the 2012 in it too.

More specific shenanigans aside, JavaScript will always be the king of unintuitive syntax. Some of these f-string tidbits are very much strange, but you'd have to be implementing something specific to encounter them. Meanwhile over in JS you're still waiting for your dependencies to install so you can compare two arrays.

That is exactly the kind of unfounded, strawman-riddled criticism I was after ;-)

What does an algorithmic task such as array comparison have to do with language syntax? The answer is nothing.

Sure, some languages might have builtins for comparing certain things, or doing intersections/differences, but those only apply to arrays of primitives, and even in those cases the utility of the builtins completely depends on the use case, and those builtins still have nothing to do with syntax.

> those only apply to arrays of primitives

I guess you've not written much python, or just not used any custom types in lists if you have.

    class Thing:
        def __init__(self, a, b):
            self.a = a; self.b = b
        def __eq__(me, them):
            return me.a == them.a and me.b == them.b
    >>>[1, 2, Thing(6, "Hi")] == [1, 2, Thing(6, "Hi")]
    True
    >>>[1, 2, Thing(6, "Hi")] == [1, 2, Thing(6, "Hello")]
    False

In this case, the builtins are syntax, namely the `==` operator. There's a uniform syntax for comparing two objects for equality.

Sure, the language has a mechanism for overriding the equality operator for classes, just like Java has .equals(), but the code is overriding the builtin algorithm. The case of comparing mixed type arrays is not a usual case and seems contrived. In JS, you could do the same by extending Array and using that, or implementing a custom .equals() for your objects. I suppose Python is a bit more functional in that respect.

Every now and then since deleting my account I click on a link to an X post and am reminded I can't read the replies, and then I am thankful again to my past self for deleting my account. I urge everyone to delete the app and their accounts, realistically there are just much better sources of information nowadays. It's not worth the mental headache to get your news from X, which recently honestly hasn't even been good at delivering it.

It's interesting, this concept of "just following orders" recurs so much in almost all contexts. War behavior really seems to be the baseline of human interaction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders

> but the Python API isn't all that wonderful, and dynamic typing means that I spend too much time debugging

I don't know, this just seems more like inertia. "I'd rather stick to what I know best than this popular thing." Which is fine, and I'm glad Java has made improvements making it easier to hit the ground running. But blaming the use of Java on the inadequacies of Python? The python API can do just about anything, it has regex toolings, I've never found myself needing anything else. And the typing complaints? Yeah it can be annoying if you're not good at keeping track of your own typing hints, but modern python supports type annotations and linters like mypy[1] catch everything related to that just fine. I've always admired many of Java's features, but let's not act like the reason for using Java for scripting is the pitfalls of Python. It's just because of an underlying preference for Java.

1. https://mypy-lang.org/

> Yeah it can be annoying if you're not good at keeping track of your own typing hints

If you write all the code you deal with, then sure. My experiences on big projects tend to be typing problems introduced by libraries. The kind where documentation and the decorators suggest it'll only ever return some specific value type, but then very occasionally it'll return a tuple of that value type and a message.

Fair, but in the context of scripting, which seems to be the focus of this article, how often are you dealing with complex library code? When I write scripts for file manipulation / simple automation, I'm usually not dealing with complex library objects. Plenty of os method calls, plenty of regex matches, but little else in this context. Big projects are another thing entirely. There's a plethora of reasons why you may want to use a different language for a certain project type. But it doesn't seem fair to imply that python is uniquely handicapped (or otherwise inferior to Java) for scripting and simple automation use-cases.

Didn't know about pep 750, that's really cool that there's a push for native templating. I just hope we see a gradual stepping away of "everything clientside" and the JS framework hell that exists today. I've tried and I've tried but I just can't take javascript seriously. It's so ugly and overbuilt. It should never have been brought to the server, Node was a horrible mistake. In my ideal future, the web returns to servers doing their jobs, and JS being used for minor interactivity features when necessary.

> I just hope we see a gradual stepping away of "everything clientside" and the JS framework hell that exists today.

The nice thing about Blazor is you can either have your templates as WASM, or have them be back-end driven, and Blazor does a bit of the gluing for you so your site updates as things happen and need to be updated, like Phoenix LiveView.