At least for me, writing the code // using the IDE // prompting the LLM to do the thing is not the hard part. The hard part is always understanding the actual problem // underlying assumptions // actual customer need and then architecturing the right solution to that. Actually implementing the solution is the easy part, and LLMs have made that now even easier.
But they've not really helped interpret customer requirements when they give you logically inconsistent / unimplementable business processes that need major re-vamping before they can be coded. To some extent they can help de-code poorly worded emails sent by some exec while golfing or in a meeting. But they still can't conjure information out from nothing. Nor are they that good at helping to play the political game when you have team X and team Y depending new feature Z, but feature Z requires completely changing how either team does process Ab but neither will even admit that their processes aren't compatible with each other.
My wife has had numerous papers rejected because the reviewer belonged to a competing lab. Took a few tries and a request to exclude a certain reviewer and hey presto! published!
Yep this is what has happened to small teams. You really only have time to approve the dependabot changes and go go go. Otherwise you'll never get anything productive done.
The other option is to simply ignore updates and do them on a schedule, e.g. once every 1-2 months.
A lot of the time in my experience this comes down to coders thinking the logic is the same and abstracting something to a central source, when from a business perspective the rules are similar but actually different.
So many times I've had to untangle these types of abstractions when business asks for changes to case X but not Case Y. OR worse, business asks for changes to case X, but it also affects Case Y due to abstractions. Business see X/Y as different things so did not even think to mention that the new suggested behavior is to only affect case X, but to coders they're the same.
It's nice to have that luxury, we just don't have the manpower to devote to that. Major versions sure, otherwise it's just update and run test-suite and some smoke tests.
> Just please for the love of all that's good and pretty, don't store a JWT in a httpOnly cookie.
Depends on who is saying, I've read the same thing but the other way around. Never store a JWT in LocalStorage and always store it in a httpOnly cookie.
A lot of these type of coding practice debates are theoretical. IMO coding is more-or-less fancy blue collar work. What matters is what works in practice, not what works in theory.
A lot of this is not about increased yield, but healthier more nutritious plants, a healthier soil that binds more carbon, a more diverse farmland supporting a more diverse set of insects and animals and so forth.
The monocropped modern agriculture is not only producing dead soil, farmers that become reliant upon exterior input supplied by global conglomerates (i.e. ther margins don't go to the person doing the farming, but everyone suppling the stuff the farmer needs), and causes a lot of damage to local ecosystems.
One big problem here is that 'organic' as-in certified organic, means something very different from Real Organic (as coined by the Rodale Institute). And among people who try to grow more organically (as in with nature, not the certified mess big-ag created to steal the term) there is a wide variety of ways people do it in a wide variety of places that have a wide variety of history.
It's just an insane amount of money to invest with the long-term effect of you oversaturating the chip market.
Throwing 20B into a chip fab in the EU would be politically a very unpopular move, if it's done as a public company or worse directly state owned, you'll royally piss of Taiwan, South Korea and China and it's likely they'd retaliate by e.g. subsidising their auto industry more in order to give the death blow to the EU auto industry.
Think about leaving your bike unlocked in times square, vs. the top of a 7 000 meter mountain in the himalayas.
Which unlocked (unsecure) bike is more likely to be stolen, and ergo has a lower risk attached?
----
Obscurity does not help you when the thief has already found your bike, nor is obscurity very helpful for keeping your bike safe if you happen to live in times square.
But if you live at the top of a himalayan peak, you can be fairly certain you're not going to have your bike stolen.
But they've not really helped interpret customer requirements when they give you logically inconsistent / unimplementable business processes that need major re-vamping before they can be coded. To some extent they can help de-code poorly worded emails sent by some exec while golfing or in a meeting. But they still can't conjure information out from nothing. Nor are they that good at helping to play the political game when you have team X and team Y depending new feature Z, but feature Z requires completely changing how either team does process Ab but neither will even admit that their processes aren't compatible with each other.