yallpendantools

그저께discuss

> Is that by weight? By volume?

It's holding up 3300 pounds. Pounds is a unit of weight.

> Even so, spaghetti strand is not known for strength or tension resistance even when considering the weight/size/volume.

That's...kinda the point? We have something we don't give two thoughts about (slug tooth) comparable in scale to something not known for strength or tension resistance (spaghetti) holding up to something ginormous as if it's magic. Clearly, we should study slug teeth more!

Imagine if a strand of spaghetti can hold 3300 pounds. It's not possible with spaghetti but with slug teeth, it is! Now imagine the possibilities!

yallpendantools

5일 전discuss

Reminds me of the tensest moment in my first month driving and with a brand new car too.

I started driving and something beeped. I was in pretty thick traffic at the time so I nervously (I can't emphasize this enough) found a quieter side road to troubleshoot.

I think there was also an indicator on the dashboard to couple with the beep but if it did, the icon representation left much for guesswork. After about five minutes rifling through the manual, I figured out the car was telling me the handbrake was not fully disengaged.

It's not as catastrophic as it sounds---the car drove smoothly when I started it. I was only off by a few millimeters. The way I disengaged the handbrake at the time padded my knuckles between the lever and the panel, leading to a gap from full disengagement.

I would still be confused in traffic had I known what the issue was from the get-go but I would also be way less nervous. The kind of nerves a rookie driver could really do away with. I could've addressed that problem on a red light.

yallpendantools

11일 전discuss

> It’s a pretty safe assumption that the people who worked on the codebase before were as smart as you.

Amen! Code is never written in a vacuum. Code is never shaped only by engineering but by business and organizational compromises as well. I hate those guys who declare we absolutely must do sweeping changes to the codebase/architecture so that we are in line with the latest best practices after spending an hour with the codebase. As if the guys who spent the last 3+ years staring and building on said codebase didn't know any better (unless of course you were hired specifically because you ought to know better!).

yallpendantools

11일 전discuss

Software engineering is much easier if you assume you have no users. Except for the part where you have to make money, that is.

yallpendantools

12일 전discuss

My gut reaction to this was "Duh, the money is in AI now, leaving less for crypto".

Then I looked at the numbers.

TFA: $189M so far for 2026.

CNBC: $119M so far for 2024.

TFA has already surpassed the numbers for 2024! I don't know what to make of that other than a magnification of the ills in the American political system. And yeah, I'm sad crypto still has money even with all the snAIk oil going around. Turns out I don't really understand how money works at this scale.

Caveat lector: there's of course probably some explanation I missed. Like maybe we're counting firms that has double-dipped in crypto and AI.

yallpendantools

17일 전discuss

I agree with your sentiment and would advise the same. However, I would caution anyone sympathetic to the idea: we are probably at the stage where the current generation(s) who can make a difference have to plant trees whose fruit they will not taste.

The problem exacerbated from decades and decades of causes piling up into today's effects. You are not going to undo all of that magically even with sweeping legislation or communal will. The future of a good world is still there but maybe not for us to savor.

yallpendantools

19일 전discuss

There was a time when if your "boss" tells you to install a keylogger on your work machine, it's a black-teaming exercise. How the times have changed...

yallpendantools

20일 전discuss

I've spoken about my troubles getting as much mileage out of LLMs as before while being vague about my industry and, well, this hits the nail in the head.

> because the tooling used in the gaming industry is as unfriendly to LLM coding as it gets: Heavily visual scripting based

At the start of the LLM craze, we (as a team) put ChatGPT to test with Godot. It wasn't very successful in that, IIRC, GDScript 2 was just released and ChatGPT's training corpus was so obviously based on GDScript 1.

We could make ChatGPT outline steps of how to accomplish things in Godot, sort of like getting a customized tutorial. When code isn't involved, ChatGPT was okay and Gemini seemed to fare better. Based on vibes, I think Gemini had a marginally better handle on GDScript 2 for some reason.

I've been trying it lately with Claude still with mixed results. I had to install a few skills/extensions for it (can't tell you which as I basically just blindly followed what our AI advocate recommended). Sometimes it works but when it doesn't it's harder to put a finger on why. Overall I prefer the DX of generating customized tutorials with ChatGPT.

> extremely reflection heavy

Big time. And IME we don't even have to deal with textbook reflection here. Game entities are so convoluted (remember the Fallout 3 Train NPC, the stories of how Skyrim works, etc.) that it is really pushing inheritance and OO to contortions it shouldn't be doing.

Dirty confession: in our game we have this GIANT switch-statement dealing with game objects. It happens in a handful of places, for different game object types. LLMs (Copilot and Codex) could generate the monkey code of adding a switch case and even writing the body but sooner than later, when the new objects have to interact with others, LLMs just can't reason around it. Not to mention the hundred edge cases you have to consider!

And before some smart-ass comments: in my almost-decade of dealing with this code base there have been a handful of attempts to "refactor" these switch-statements, always a newcomer's enthusiastic effort. I'm proud to say, I've managed to slay one of the giants, the only successful effort to my knowledge, and this only happened last year. But I did so by basically delegating to another of the giants; they turned out to be twins and we could do without one. The dirty way is the clean way because the alternative contains Lovecraftian geometries.

Claude has been great for finding edge-case bugs but that's only once the code has been written properly. Generally if QA reports a bug on a pre-release feature, it's at most 50/50 if Claude can debug it. But if it's a player report/live incident, I'd say Claude's chances goes up to around 80%.

All that said,

> if you are in the game industry, you probably have nothing to worry about in terms of LLM coding replacing you

Hah-hah. Look, I agree with you but please get in touch with upper management. As an engineer I'm confident on the value I bring to the table but I'm not sure management "gets" that. Like, no matter how I tell them what features I shipped, what infra I built, etc., it doesn't come across to them that LLMs would not have been able to automate that output!

yallpendantools

21일 전discuss

> When in doubt, grab the RFC and figure it out.

Back in the day, I was using Cloudhopper, a Twitter-developed library for the SMPP protocol (not to be confused with SMTP!). Protocols being protocols, there are strict limits on field sizes, defined on the actual protocol spec. I noticed that Cloudhopper didn't impose those limits, however.

Long story short, it turns out they just left out strictly imposing field limits because other implementations didn't care either. De facto has overruled de jura and the inmates are running the asylum!

yallpendantools

22일 전discuss

I could be wrong but, based on experience, the trick seems to be to give them a chance to prove you wrong. ;)

yallpendantools

25일 전discuss

Huh? Anthropic bought the books it seems. They acquired the books fair and square. They ripped up their own books; I may hold that to be sacrilege but those aren't my books. They're not even library books. They're Anthropic's books. Why should I care if they burn the books they've legally acquired? They don't even seem to be rare or coveted copies. I'm just happy for the secondhand booksellers who made bank from the transaction.

yallpendantools

25일 전discuss

> Does Gitlab do better with this?

Not exactly but if you're not obsessed with maintaining a monorepo, Gitlab allows you to organize your repos around organizations, which then has granular permissions. The underlying primitives is still Git, of course, so you can just submodule as necessary.

yallpendantools

25일 전discuss

This. People forget a lot of Git's design philosophy harks back to the ethos of open source development. Enterprise features have made it in over the years but still mostly with the FOSS development workflow/model in mind. Also why the most enterprise-y of features (like LFS) are add-ons rather than core.

yallpendantools

28일 전discuss

TFA:

> Making matters worse, many datacenters now in the pipeline in the US are slated for areas already experiencing drought, according to analysis by The Guardian newspaper.

If it's astroturfed it's only because the people complaining don't have enough water to grow natural grass on their lawn. FTFY.

yallpendantools

29일 전discuss

From the article, it seems to me they've been "relegated" to coming up with Leetcode problems for AI. Which, let's face it, a bunch of them probably already did before for their SWE interview circus. I can see why they may feel under-employed/under-utilized but aside from the dystopian data gathering, I really find it hard to see what they are complaining about.

The article even admits that their current tasks are easier than before. For the same paycheck! For 200K I will dredge through the most obscure IMO/Leetcode/ICPC problems and the palm of my hands will remain delicately smooth, in danger only of drying from the air conditioning. If there is no meaning and dignity in that I'm sure I'll have plenty leftover from that comp to find meaning and dignity elsewhere be it a side gig, charity work, or heck even just good times with my family and my social circle. A lot of people "just do a job" for much, much less and still live rich inner lives.

Really, an orchestra of small violins playing while I read this one.

yallpendantools

지난달discuss

I think the myth/claim of a 10x developer is true but only relative to said rockstar engineer's immediate environment.

Put simply, the 10x developer is a 10x because they've spent ~10x more time immersed in the problem domain than the average developer.

What they do is more sleight-of-hand than Tony Stark engineering his way out of a terrorist cell. If 10x engineer takes a weekend to solve a problem that has stumped the team for a month, it's because he's collected the necessary context to solve the problem over the course of their long career; doesn't mean the answer didn't need to be synthesized, but they already had the raw materials in their cupboard. They have a giants' shoulder to stand on because they bothered climbing. They didn't derive anything from first principles; no one prototyped an Iron Man suit from scrap contraband.

The implication being anyone can be a 10x engineer in the right environment.

---

Allow me to carry my own throne with an anecdote, believe what you will: once upon a time, Engineering Manager had the brilliant idea to create a modular system for our main product, the pitch being that we can outsource feature development to contractors while keeping team costs down as we only need to maintain a lean modular system. They tested the idea on a couple of easy scope projects which were successful.

Then came the big test. Three projects outsourced to a team of four contractors. These projects were far more complex than the first two: lots of state management and integration with other systems. In due time deadline neared and the contractors had a very pretty UI that just needed to be wired in. I got pulled in to see the projects home. It was supposed to be easy if not for the Pareto Principle. Relationship with the contractors soon soured as they bailed, showing us that they've technically already accomplished the project on their billable hours spreadsheet. We, the regular team, just needed to deploy the code they turned in but the deployment is none of their concern apparently.

That's when I had to roll-up my sleeves, got dirty with their spaghetti code. The way I see it, the contractors fell on the part where they had to integrate with other systems because said systems were legacy, i.e., created before the idea of the Lean Modular Main System. Honestly, even I didn't know exactly how to work with them but, crucially, I knew how to get answers when the going got tough. I knew how to quickly figure out what I didn't know because as a regular employee I knew things beyond first principles.

In the end, two out of the three projects deployed. They were only a couple weeks late. IIRC the third one only failed because it really ran out of time budget. Upper Management was not happy but Engineering Manager stuck out his neck for me, for which I am genuinely grateful. I didn't get exactly the coveted 10x wording out of him but he pointed out that I released 2/3 whereas a team of four couldn't even release one.

That's not entirely accurate of course. I could code you up a decent web frontend but I could not, for the life of me, get all those pretty UI animations to work even if it's my only way out of a terrorist cell.

yallpendantools

지난달discuss

My thoughts are, apparently, a threat to OpenAI's valuation. lol.

yallpendantools

지난달discuss

[dead]

yallpendantools

지난달discuss

This was my earliest use-case for LLMs and it remains to this day as the most compelling value proposition of all the fancy new LLMs.

I have always tried to abide by DRY in my programming career with the huge exception of writing unit tests. I made the mistake, early in my career when Test-Driven Development was all the rage, of making unit tests reflect the inheritance structure of the actual code. It just made sense. Needless to say, it quickly descended into the most bizarre manifestation of inheritance hell as tests randomly failed with no correlation to the changes done in the core code.

Hence, I resolved to make unit tests the huge exception to DRY. The more straightforward your tests are, the better. Endeavor that each test method up to a test class should read understandably on its own.

This, of course, made tests quite a mechanical chore to write. Which makes it the perfect use case for these large, verbose, and humorless daemons. Bonus that they are also very good at vibing out the set-up needed for a test so I can focus on specifying the test cases I want rather than setting up mock after stub after fake.

The output is also very easy to review and verify. I see no moral quandary in this kind of usage.

yallpendantools

지난달discuss

I think it's not so much the technical scope that makes it "not the AI you read of as a child" but the societal impact. AI/robots/automation was supposed to usher in some kind of techno-utopia for all the good and bad that it entails. Cue the quote about AI supposedly about taking over the boring tasks so we can spend more time making art, achieving self-actualization.

The AI you read of as a child (speaking for myself, coming from a lot of 80s sci-fi stories) is not all good of course; that's where most of the plot's conflict comes from. But LLMs, for a lot of people, are more burdened with the downsides sci-fi stories warned us about with very little, if any, of the advantages.

And speaking of forests for the trees, you zoom out a bit more and see that this AI hype train is following a years-long trend of SV being exposed for its moral failings. We have repeatedly shown, as an industry, that we missed the point of the literature we so love to quote. From the concept of "meritocracy" to naming a company "Palantir". The AI hype is not an isolated incident. We love to quote Jeff Goldblum from Jurassic Park but it's all rhetoric---we don't really ask ourselves that question!