That’s true, but this repo has thousands of bugs. They could at least find one that was in the training set, but also did not contain the location in the bug description.
I wanted to find the actual change performed by these agents so I watched the embedded video. I can not believe what I saw.
The video shows a private fork of a pubic repository. The bug is real, but it was resolved in February 2023 and doesn’t seem like the solution was automated [1]
The bug has a stack trace attached with a big arrow pointing to line 223 of a backend_compat.py file. A quick grasp on this stack trace and you already know what happened and why, and how to fix this, but…
not for the agent. It seems to analyze the repository in multiple steps and tries to locate the class. Why did they even release this video?
Most people don’t operate this way. Choice is painful and induces anxiety. There’s a high chance of getting buyers remorse even if you chose the „objectively best” model.
A good salesperson will make sure the choice process is relatively quick and painless. You will feel good afterwards knowing that all the 125 aspects that differentiate this model from the other ones are not that important. The one you chose runs your favourite apps, integrates well with your car and your home entertainment system.
Understanding this and learning how to sell helps in life, incl. negotiating architectural changes with non technical decision makers.
The author seems to ignore the fact that CSV got so popular because it is human readable. If anyone wanted a binary format there’s plenty of them - most better than this DSV.
Also, I’m on a mobile right now, so can’t verify that, but it seems the format is flawed. The reader decodes UTF8 strings after splitting the binary buffer by the delimiter, but I believe the delimiter may be a part of a UTF8 character.
Edit: just checked and there’s actually no chance that the delimiter the author chose would be part of UTF8 encoding of any other character than the delimiter itself
You wanted to make a point that time does not depend on physical location, while you chose an example that proves otherwise.
There is no absolute time in spacetime, so your calendar invite from an alien friend would include not only the coordinates on Jupiter but also a time value relative to something. Possibly Earth. Maybe even UTC, as observed on Earth.
The article is based only on the stats of a single freelancing site. It may be big, but it still represents only a sample of the overall market data. We do not know how big the sample is and whether it represented the same percentage of the overall market size at the beginning and end of the reported period.
Only the first conclusion listed mentions Upwork. The rest sounds like it reports a general market trend.
The author says the data was provided by a company called Revealera, but doesn’t disclose he is a co-founder. It doesn’t affect the quality of the data by itself but I’m always careful to make conclusions from data presented this way.
I visited a couple of new job ads on Upwork and I found that:
1. The „hire rate” of clients is usually between 0 and 70%.
2. Upwork has an AI solution for clients that makes it very easy to post a new job. Meaning it is easier than ever to think about an idea, post a new „job” and forget about it, never hiring anyone.