I think that snippet is perfectly reasonable if you are an individual or a small team in charge of the whole stack. This line of code is unlikely ever to change. Contrast this with React+Redux, where the code must constantly change to accommodate schema changes from the backend. The React project thus changes more often, but this is a false sense of maintainability. Further, imagine the 200+ dependencies a starter React app requires and how all of these must be kept up to date.
It would look even worse on their part, and there will probably still be a lot of people boycotting Reddit by their own volition regardless of how the site operates.
This is an important distinction but it simplifies the situation in my opinion. A 3 year old may only see one cat, but it has probably seen many other things in its life already. Humans likely also have prewired neurology to recognise eyes and other common features. So the analogy is seem more to me like one-shot or few-shot learning with an already partially trained model.
I have increasingly become disinterested in CGI-heavy movies. I have taken to watching more foreign-language films, which seem to still be more interpersonal and grounded in reality. I say this as a person who would usually prefer sci-fi and fantasy over other genres, which are the genres which are historically the most heavy in CGI and VFX.
This is my feeling exactly, it is a semantic auto-complete. Should/can it write your core business logic? Probably not, but there is a good chance it can infer and suggest logical patterns in implementation.
This is actually the primary message I got from the recent Bing announcement and demos. When the new Bing makes a suggestion for a TV, Microsoft wants to have sold those suggestion spots to the highest bidder.
Out of curiosity, what would you say is hardest constraint on this (brain replication) happening? Do you think that it would be an limitation on imaging/scanning technology?
Politeness is an orthogonal concept to truth. The article clearly states that programming philosophies "can be boiled down into a simple statement", and the comment you were referring to takes issue with this.
I find the idea of a manifesto in software quite off-putting, since it is inherently idealogical. The ideology itself might have redeeming factors, but I think that it is a poor vehicle for conveying ideas. This manifesto is written in the first-person ("There's something I call fixing a bug by sedimentation"), but it is trying to be universal. If this person has opinions on software engineering, why not just voice those as an individual?
This book is a bit divisive, but I will mention it anyway. I have been reading "Infinite Jest" by David Wallace this year. While being fiction from the late 90s, I think it predicts some developments in the modern attention economy freakishly well. I am only half way through, so I am hesitant to recommend it, but I have truly read nothing like it.