• 20 Posts
  • 33 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 9th, 2025

help-circle












  • 1980s: You have to walk to the arcade, you have to stand to play, and you are charged for every minute of play time.

    1990s: Computer technology has improved to the point that anyone can have the arcade in their home, you sit to play, and you are charged once for the game and can play for as long as you want.

    2010s and onward: Home internet connections are now ubiquitous, enabling instant digital money transactions from anywhere, so the games industry can now nickel and dime you for everything. Video games are casinos. The coin machines are back.

    There’s a golden age of gaming starting with the introduction of home consoles and ending when they started needing an internet connection.






  • The CEO of Socket is this guy. I’m not sure that someone with those credentials would be heading a company engaged in what basically amounts to racketeering. Though, I suppose he might be unaware it’s happening. The company has many investors, any of who would benefit from creating an environment that supports the company’s existence without the awareness of any of the employees. But it’s clear this isn’t some scam operation run by desperate people out of India, which was my first thought from reading your comment. There are reputable people with their reputations at stake. It would be a Theranos-level scandal if what you say was actually determined to be occurring. So, on the one hand, there are reputations at stake, and, on the other hand, Silicon Valley is not incapable of committing fraud.






  • Using it for writing tests is attractive because the way we generally test software sucks. Programs are written abstractly for an unimaginably large number of cases, but only tested for a finite few. It’s so ugly and boring and inexact. I’d be so giddy if a language/system came along that did formal methods properly, enabling me to formally prove correctness in every case. Programming is fun. Proofs are fun. Tests are not fun. And I’m here on Earth to have the most fun.

    This is all to say that using LLMs to do the boring work of writing tests is a suboptimal solution for testing software. It fits a general pattern. Yes, you can learn X by having a conversation with an LLM, but I believe it will be a subpar experience compared to forcing yourself to read a professionally-written book on the subject.