> When people perceive one school to be better than another
Often there's more to it than just perception. My parents moved to a smaller suburb so my brother and I could attend schools with higher standardized test scores, lower class sizes, less violent incidents, more extracurricular activities, and ultimately _a lot_ more funding. Both districts were public. They made this decision looking at publicly accessible data in the 80s/90s.
Looking back, it was objectively one of the best decisions they made for our future... if not the best.
---
Sure - address fraud is very common in regards to getting your kid to a better education opportunity but when there are stark, vast differences between districts I have a hard time blaming people. Especially given my anecdotal experience.
> Sure - address fraud is very common in regards to getting your kid to a better education opportunity but when there are stark, vast differences between districts I have a hard time blaming people. Especially given my anecdotal experience.
Indeed, a friend of mine in elementary school was one example; his grandparents lived down the street from me, and his parents were in a terrible school district.
Ope.. getting hung up on the statement "perception has a correlation with reality." Reality is the way things are, and perception is quintessentially subjective. It is not guaranteed that perception correlates with reality - just spend 10 minutes with my family for this lesson.
I argue the difference between school districts in the US is not perception, as it is not subjective - it is fact. It is reality. This is something that has been so extensively studied I wish all of us could accept it as fact.
Sorry to get hung up on a word. I find that people making these decisions aren't typically doing it from a subjective place -- they're making data-driven decisions to maximize their child's opportunities.
Art is subjective so everyone's entitled to their takes on it.
Personally, I don't like when art makes me contemplate the delta between _intended ideals_ vs. actual execution.
Especially for this piece... it's just fake. "We made a camera that's going to take a 1,000 year exposure!" - and it's like... maaaan. No, no you didn't - and it's unethical to market that you did.
I used an EIZO FlexScan EV2730Q (1:1), and upgraded to a DualUp.
It is the best configuration I've found for programming and CLI work. For gaming I typically use one of the normal widescreens to the left/right of it.
Only downside I've found is that I screen share often, and the odd aspect ratio means sometimes I have to use one of the normal widescreens instead to avoid small text on the audience's side.
Also I ran into some scaling issues on Mac but got past these using BetterDisplay.
Overall - love the LG DualUp, my only suggestion is to pair it with a normal monitor :)
I get the reluctance to change HN and appreciate the consistency. But, in good faith, this one is a clear accessibility issue that needs to be addressed. I think a change to just get the contrast to minimal best-practices/standards would't compromise the platform.
Devil's advocate against myself for a sec: HN is a site largely used by engineers/technical professionals. We can be an insufferable bunch, especially in regards to change. Maybe the social fallout isn't worth the change and I just would't have the data/context to understand that...? Just throwing it out there. I may just not understand.
In addition to audio quality, people have _constant_ problems with their audio setup across all platforms when using Bluetooth. I've gotten to the point where I will just outright buy someone a plain USB mic just so I can consistently get them on a call without 10 minutes of fumbling audio interfaces.
Unfortunately, even after buying them a USB mic + explicitly banning Bluetooth on calls I still catch devs trying to use their fancy Bluetooth gaming headset (or whatever) which can easily push meeting start times back by 5-10 minutes.
Some conference apps just suck at audio. Teams will always pick the wrong mic / headphones, even though I don't have any bluetooth headset connected. And even after I've managed to convince it to use the right one during a call, for the very next call it forgets everything.
But yeah, to your mic point, some people just don't seem to care. I have a weekly conference with someone who takes it from his open office. I can hear his colleague way better than I can hear him.
TLDR in the article is that both technologies are valid and have a significant use case. I still work plenty with the browser and would _absolutely_ use JPEG XL as a replacement for WebP images, traditional JPEGs, and PNGs if I could.
It's a shame Google/Chrome is not supporting the tech. It would be a major improvement in the landscape.
Lots of devs out there have great social skills which can translate well to sales. Sales is primarily communication and human connection and plenty of devs are capable of that.
Lots of devs start in sales because those jobs/careers are incredibly prevalent. Think basic sales jobs like retail, call centers, etc.
Lots of business people unironically "learn coding" to great success. Some even build "huge products" that solve big problems.
---
Anecdotally, I know people who fall into all of these categories. I don't think we should condemn people to one function/talent... and, I don't think we need to talk down to cross-functional devs or business people.
> Trying to get some non-trivial code out of GPT that isn't a mindless boilerplate
For some of us, the boilerplate code generated by ChatGPT is incredibly valuable. I have been utilizing it to create snippets of code for languages that I am not familiar with in terms of syntax. I understand that I may be criticized for this, however, I am not an expert in all of the languages I am required to support. Thus, I often find myself struggling with the syntax while understanding the overall concept I am attempting to accomplish.
Example prompt: "Write me a proof of concept in language X that serializes JSON then POSTS to a HTTP API endpoint."
The thing is - how often do you end up needing such snippets? How much more useful is receiving it from ChatGPT than looking it up in a search engine?
Continuing with the theme of your example, at least in my experience most of the programmer's time is spent on figuring out which endpoint do you need, why and when does that endpoint sometimes return something you don't expect and how to deal with that happening. Writing JSON serializing in a language your head got rusty with may be faster with ChatGPT than it would be otherwise, but the overall benefit seems negligible, especially when you need to watch out at every step for convincingly-looking nonsense.
All in good faith, I believe that receiving assistance from ChatGPT is far more useful than looking up snippets on a search engine. Instead of delving through semi-appropriate snippets, I can concisely describe what I need in one or two sentences and ChatGPT typically provides an accurate result, unless the query is opinion-based, complex, or obscure. I am not expecting perfect code since I take it upon myself to polish the output.
I am now experimenting with ChatGPT parsing our own historical documentation, such as API references, and even basic markdown notes. When it comes to API endpoints I can get 80-90% accurate boilerplate. Admittedly, ChatGPT cannot provide assistance in understanding unexpected behavior, unless perhaps it is due to a misunderstanding of the language. And, though it is true that resolving API endpoint issues can be a time-consuming task, this does not negate the time savings that ChatGPT can provide in other situations.
I would urge you to try it out in your own workflow before calling shots on if the usefulness is negligible or not. And even then, I'd say not every tool is for everyone. This thing is really helping me out and I'm seeing long-term viability for it in my workflows.
> I would urge you to try it out in your own workflow before calling shots on if the usefulness is negligible or not.
What makes you think I didn't? I already stated that:
> It only seems useful for when you know exactly what to do, but you don't feel like typing it all out - which happens
It does pretty well in these kind of situations when the code in question is trivial, but in my experience the time savings coming from that are minor. In fact, its main value comes from my ADHD mind not being able to focus on boring stuff I already know how to do - in those cases, GPT gets me the boilerplate I can start operating on right away, which sure is helpful as otherwise I'd just end up in a web browser scrolling some stuff. Other than that? It seems like verifying ChatGPT's output is much more time consuming than doing it on your own as soon as you get out of "problems copy'n'pastable from StackOverflow" territory.
In good faith I really don't know what you're arguing for.
If you re-read our conversation I express that simple snippets of code from ChatGPT have been accurate enough, ultimately saving me time (paraphrasing). You then push back on me with the following:
> The thing is - how often do you end up needing such snippets? How much more useful is receiving it from ChatGPT than looking it up in a search engine?
> [...] but the overall benefit seems negligible, especially when you need to watch out at every step for convincingly-looking nonsense
I doubled down, doing my best to elaborate where it has added value to my workflow, when it breaks down for me, and addressed specific concerns in your comments. When you say "overall benefit seems negligible" - I read that very clearly as overall the benefit (of ChatGPT) seems negligible (regarding the context of our conversation). That context to me was that ChatGPT helps me with simple snippets and POCs. I did my best to politely rebut that with my personal and professional experiences regarding the tool.
Now you say:
> its main value comes from my ADHD mind not being able to focus on boring stuff I already know how to do - in those cases, GPT gets me the boilerplate I can start operating on right away, which sure is helpful
This is directly compatible and agreeing with what I feel I have been advocating for since my first message in this conversation - that using ChatGPT for simple boilerplate code can be valid (paraphrasing). But, I feel like this is contradictory to, and in conflict with what you previously said: "the overall benefit seems negligible".
---
Overall this conversation seems to contradict itself, and with that it's confusing and frustrating to me. Sorry.
> that using ChatGPT for simple boilerplate code can be valid
I don't disagree. I just don't see it as "incredibly valuable", it's way too erratic for that. When it works well it does help, but it works well in such a small minority of software developer's tasks that its impact is pretty much negligible overall - and what I meant to point out is that this is an opinion coming from someone who does find it useful in certain cases.
It makes it a bit easier for me to not get distracted by my web browser, sometimes. It does not change my quality of life as a programmer at all. It would be probably more valuable to delegate these tasks to a junior dev in my team if it had one - the junior would learn from that experience and get closer to becoming a senior, ChatGPT won't.
> I don't disagree. I just don't see it as "incredibly valuable"
Lol - that is by definition disagreeing with the first sentence that I said in our conversation. You disagree that it is "incredibly valuable" and have spent every comment saying that the overall impact of ChatGPT for developers is "negligible overall."
Have you read what you're replying to? I said that I don't disagree "that using ChatGPT for simple boilerplate code can be valid". It's a completely different thing than what you're implying.
We're commenting under an article that talks about how ChatGPT supposedly makes most of human's skills worthless. Similar sentiment can be seen in many places when it comes to programming. It can't do that if all it helps with are some trivial snippets sometimes. It's helpful for getting boilerplate going, but getting help with boilerplate has negligible effect on programmer's work.
Yes. I find it sorta offensive that you assume otherwise.
---
Let's boil this down. I said "the boilerplate ChatGPT provides me is incredibly valuable," and further elaborated that using the tool is "valid."
You disagree with "incredibly valuable" but "don't disagree" with the tool being "valid."
So - I'm saying. We disagree that boilerplate output from ChatGPT is "incredibly valuable" and frankly that's just gonna be subjective regardless. Let's agree to disagree here. I just find it funny that you say "I don't disagree" then outright disagree with the exact language I used in the first sentence of our conversation regarding the value of this tool.
---
> We're commenting under an article that talks about how ChatGPT supposedly makes most of human's skills worthless. Similar sentiment can be seen in many places when it comes to programming. It can't do that if all it helps with are some trivial snippets sometimes.
And honestly I feel like this is why our communication and conversation is frustrated here. I don't see our conversation as being a proxy for the infinitely complex and complicated "making human skills worthless" conversation... personally, I just wanted to say "I use this tool for X, and personally have found great value in it."
I would rather people not throw cloudflare at everything, it's ruining the web. Especially with those horrible browser checks that never work right and lock you out of sites.
Often there's more to it than just perception. My parents moved to a smaller suburb so my brother and I could attend schools with higher standardized test scores, lower class sizes, less violent incidents, more extracurricular activities, and ultimately _a lot_ more funding. Both districts were public. They made this decision looking at publicly accessible data in the 80s/90s.
Looking back, it was objectively one of the best decisions they made for our future... if not the best.
---
Sure - address fraud is very common in regards to getting your kid to a better education opportunity but when there are stark, vast differences between districts I have a hard time blaming people. Especially given my anecdotal experience.