It’s written by folks who want to convince the military to do better.
The fact that the US wastes a lot of money on what’s likely a very ineffective military is not a surprise, surely. Yes, they should have a better logistics system for all that money.
Because Russia doesn’t actually have the resources to do this at the scale required. Russia is also not trying to obliterate Ukraine. They want to take over a real economy, not a wasteland.
Gaza is about 1/20 the size of Kyiv, has 1/5 the population, has far fewer resources to fight back, and is much closer to its adversary. Kyiv is also just one city amongst dozens, making up less than 1/10th population of Ukraine.
Not sure we need to wait for the next war. The Iran war has shown some pretty major holes in US military (mostly Navy) logistics already when they aren’t picking a fight with someone who can’t fight back at all.
It’s exhausting to read comments like yours where you are clearly triggered by a grammatical construction and reacting far more formulaically than the comment you’re addressing. The reason AI follows these grammatical patterns is because real humans also write that way. I personally identified with the word “consistency” specifically. Yes, that and quality are what I value in CarPlay.
I would add to this other purposes of code review:
* to share knowledge among the team — if code has been reviewed then at least two people know about it
* to ensure the changes won’t cause problems with other systems or future plans — maybe we will be rolling out a new logging system soon and we don’t want to solve the problem in this specific way
* a chance for the reviewer and reviewee to learn something about the system or the code via the review discussion
* team coherence — code that’s well reviewed is a team effort. Working together on small things like code reviews helps teammates work better together on other tasks in the future
What is your complaint exactly? Is it better that this includes all government services? I think most folks would not immediately think of schools if the headline said “county government buildings”. I think it’s a reasonable editorial choice to emphasize school buildings in the headline.
Have you looked into anything about Claude Code, how it’s configured, how it interacts with your system, etc? Because “sloppy” is a defining characteristic.
I’m very confused. This is a web page with an embedded single-page PDF (!?) that gives zero details about how the project would work, be funded, or even look like. What is there to even discuss? Nothing about this seems very “human centered” to me.
Neither do the developers, because until recently, RAM was so cheap it didn’t matter, and we were in a situation where almost no one ever needed to consider “how much RAM will this take?” when writing code.
The fact that the US wastes a lot of money on what’s likely a very ineffective military is not a surprise, surely. Yes, they should have a better logistics system for all that money.