You're saying that as long as it proceeds as expected, then all will be ok. In the worst case (eg, at the 2,000ppm you indicate as an upper range, or after some mis-step in the process), what ppm chlorine gas would be created, and what would happen if you got a noseful of that at close quarters?
"AI Overview" blithely tells me HOCL can be easily made from the electrolysis of salt water.
Looking even a little deeper (Wikipedia) confirms that chlorine chemistry, especially when combined with electrolysis, is very complex, and it's hard to know if you're making the right thing. FWIW every sensible electrolysis-based DIY project has dire warnings about electrolysing solutions of common salt.
For reference, OP is talking about the 510(k) process. One of the issues with that process is that an approved medical device may end up with a whole tree of "derivative" devices approved through the 510(k) process. If that original device is then found to have problems and has its approval removed, those derivative devices do not also become unapproved.
Right. If you were previously digging with your bare hands, and one day everyone starts turning up with these new-fangled shovels, you'll find that both your hand-digging skills are not needed, and that hole production may exceed demand.
>you’ll be replaced by someone who is better at using AI
I place very little value in the idea of "getting better at using AI". It's like getting better at using a library, or getting better at using Google. Now that LLMs are widely available, their entire intent is to make it significantly easier to access information held in a truly vast body of written work.
I have also seen no evidence that understanding the resulting generated code is necessary.
If your job has a large component of regurgitating existing information, you are now competing with a machine that can regurgitate hugely more information and with lower-skilled operators.
To be very frank, nothing in the blog post is ground-breaking or interesting enough to be on HN. The only thing it has is its (probably knowingly) controversial title, and as such, I have no problem directing technical and nit-picking ire at it.
tsgo will inherit many benefits from go, even if it is never fully "idiomatic".
This is in direct contrast to this port, which requires significant re-architecting (or made "idiomatic", if you wish) in rust to achieve any of the benefits of the language. You can't re-architect one step at a time.