bluetooth audio is probably all one needs for phone <-> car integration. but carplay/android auto are sadly really popular.
So already, your phone can connect in two different ways, just over bluetooth, with cars today. And car companies have to support both.
Plus the car must show something on the screen when a phone isn't there, and the rear-view camera isn't on, at the very least on test drives/ showroom displays.
I don't know. On balance, the reality is cars are better overall nowadays, but every aspect of our life has gotten more complicated, including cars.
If you had the option of no screen at all, no rear-view camera, and with physical switches, would you? If this Slate truck gets released, that's the closest, but it's still required to have a rear-view camera/screen sadly.
Pretty much this. The less software on the car, the fewer problems.
It's practically impossible to test every permutation of code against every system. Maybe AI can help, but practically it'll just mean the software gets more complicated, with more features. And to top it all off, more and more features get regulated, so they have to be there. The rear-view camera requirement in particular, since you need a screen to see the output. And if you have a screen... well it's an already paid cost, so, might as well display other things too.
It's one of the reasons the US military is so good. As a soldier, you know they will come for you, behind enemy lines, so you can fight like hell, knowing that your fellows have your back.
I actually wonder about his conclusion that 50 years hence English will be unrecognizable.
There will be changes of course. Yet we are also more connected than ever, whereas the next town over would be a whole day trip in the past. The separation allows for more divergence.
Well, maybe if we get to Mars, differences might crop up again.
In fairness , Dickens is quite dry. My mind would wonder off.
In some sense, it's better these days, competition has led to care for the reader that probably didn't exist as much then, since so few people can read.
It could push back more, true. Although it's role in pair programming is the driver, you are the navigator. I often begin a session with exploring and asking it questions of the code as I would a junior developer.
Yes; yet... I thought the efficiency per compute has to do more with the nm process shrinking the die than anything else. That and power use is divided by so many more instructions per second
Actually, I wonder how they measured the 'speed' of coding, maybe I missed it. But if developers can spend more time thinking about the larger problems, that may be a cause of the slowdown. I guess it remains to be seen if the code quality or feature set improves.
Speaking just for myself, AI has allowed me to start doing projects that seemed daunting at first, as it automates much of the tedious act of actually typing code from the keyboard, and keeps me at a higher level.
But yes, I usually constrain my plans to one function, or one feature. Too much and it goes haywire.
I think a side benefit is that I think more about the problem itself, rather than the mechanisms of coding.
Yep, I can't trust software that has shone clear instructions to produce incorrect results, like Gemini did with it's image generation famously.
If nothing else, it means Gemini's team has priorities other than the results. Necessarily that means they will lag behind others who have clearer focus
Then the only way for Google to get ahead is to help promote regulation of AI to do what they're already doing. I know it's coming cuz regulators can't help themselves, but No thanks.
You could fix versions, and probably should. However willful disregard of prior interfaces encourages developers code to follow suit.
It’s not like Clojure or Common Lisp, where a decades old software still runs, mostly unmodified, the same today, any changes mainly being code written for a different environment or even compiler implementation.
This is largely because they take breaking user code way more seriously. Alot of code written in these languages seem to have similar timelessness too. Software can be “done”.
I don't know. On balance, the reality is cars are better overall nowadays, but every aspect of our life has gotten more complicated, including cars.
If you had the option of no screen at all, no rear-view camera, and with physical switches, would you? If this Slate truck gets released, that's the closest, but it's still required to have a rear-view camera/screen sadly.