I am curious in your experience how often the LLM must also update the tests. I find that if LLMs write tests after the implementation exists, they are either extremely brittle because they are coupled to the implementation, or they cover little of value because they mock everything to the point of testing nothing.
I question your assertion that more commits and releases per week is more productivity. There could be unexpected effects from your commits that create more work for you or for others and that could be hard to quantify.
Doing bad things faster might feel more productive to you, but it doesn’t mean that you are delivering more value. You might be, but the metrics you have shared to not prove that.
When deployed to Deno Deploy, KV is a wrapper around FoundationDB, selected for its use in the distributed/edge environments that Deno operates in. When used locally, it's a wrapper around SQLite.
I think the parent poster is pointing out that there are more ways of discriminating traffic than just a domain name. Such as geographic location, device IDs, etc. All of which are commonly used.
It's not proof of what is being claimed, but they are variables that would need to be controlled before being confident that Douyin is or is not adjusting content to foreign or domestic users.
From the perspective of users of solar energy on Earth, wouldn't an increase over billions of years appear constant? My intuition tells me that evolution is much faster than that, and any fluctuations due to solar cycle dynamics would already be mitigated as expected by the same process, if it is indeed so regular.
I think this is a great summary, and also highlights much of what Joe Armstrong talked about when comparing Erlang to other OO languages, and his earlier decisions to design Erlang to work in the same way whether in a single-node or multi-node environment.
Are intersex or transgender considered to be viable sexes though?
What seems reasonable to me is M/F/N where N is not capable of reproduction due to some kind of outlying error, so they cannot be a part of sexed reproduction. Are they omitted?
Sex and reproduction seem binary to me and most people. We should ignore technological or medical assistance and sort those results through the gender buckets which are more important to how they are perceived semantically, as you said.
Yeah I envision this being something that is just fixed over time as people are exposed to new and different ideas.
Yet, it seems to me that a lot of these documents are written and intended to enforce overnight changes in people's unconscious biases.
From the document:
> Each of us has the right to enjoy our experience and participate without fear of harassment, discrimination, or condescension, whether blatant or subtle.
I don't know about you guys but I hardly enjoy reading technical documentation. It's not meant to be an enjoyable experience. It's meant to convey complex meaning in a (hopefully) short amount of time. I don't think gendered pronouns add to the effectiveness of this communication method, but I also don't think we need to formalize their usage (or non-usage).
I guess I'm asking why this can't be a natural progression that we all wish to undertake as cooperating organisms rather than enforced with competition and penalties? It seems like a wasted opportunity and unnecessarily polarizing.
I instruct the LLM to follow TDD practices in certain areas, but otherwise prioritize integration style tests at the edges.