You learn that you can build a version of Postgres that passes the tests and improves on these benchmarks in rust. You gain access to a codebase that does it which you can learn a lot from too. Definitely not zero like someone else said
I mean you can learn a lot. You can learn what's possible with less effort to build a proof of concept. It's kind of like you had another engineer do it for you, you don't completely learn how to do it yourself but you can still learn a lot with much less effort
I mean if it's actually just another Postgres, you don't have to worry about network effects as much because anyone could use it in place of Postgres. But sure, the more people you know using this, the safer it would feel to use it
Agreed, if there was something actually better to switch to then I'd be interested. But seems unlikely for that to happen now - it's easier than ever to build a new github, at least the app itself but i doubt someone's gonna bother with the business effort needed to actually build it up as a reliable, trustworthy option that you know will be around for a while, which is a process that takes years when you know you're going to get disrupted. It would probably have to be open source to get early adopters to use it but somehow be nicer to use than GitHub, and there's basically no money to be made
That's how i feel about it too. But i haven't used it because there's no point in getting used to a new model if it's just gonna get taken away again. I wonder if they're also doing this to get some sort of signal on which types of users everyone is - for example someone else might always be chasing whatever the best model is
Same, I basically assumed the community around it had died out. But i guess the sole maintainer/creator is still around.
I never used elm except for doing a tutorial, but lately I've built a full stack gleam app (using coding agents for the most part, with a lot of control in the beginning on the structure of the code) and have found that process works quite well
I'm confused because this snippet implies he's doing the trading himself, whereas later in the article it says it's done by a third party on his behalf that (he says) isn't informed by his personal knowledge. So it's not as clear but insider trading as is implied here
I've re-read the comment again and I'm convinced it's not ai. It uses a pattern that ai adopted but it seems like an actual genuine comment. This is based on my spidey senses so it's not something I'm going to debate logically but it seems quite a few people agree with me. And I've seen lots of annoying ai-written stuff, and of course use Claude and Chatgpt regularly
I kind of agree with that perspective, if you're testing them on something in the exam, why isn't the course material teaching it to them? After all you're paying a lot of money for tuition. I went to a good university where the assignments were hard, but as long as you did them the final exam ended up being easy without having to study for them because you already learned everything.
But i also did a semester abroad at a German university and i found there was a different philosophy there where the assignments don't teach you much, and everyone skips class and then studies really hard for the final exam which is often 100% of your grade
Synopsis: professor decides to do a take-home exam because there was a shooting at the university and he wanted to make it easier for students. And a bunch of students cheated with ai