tunetardis

As with most script languages, you can hit the ground running in a very procedural sort of way, as you don't even have to define a main entry point. You just start coding.

But Python certainly has an object model. If I'm not mistaken, everything in Python is an object. Like even functions.

I suppose there are some aspects of the class implementation that feel a little tacked on? Like the way you need to manage the self reference manually where it may be implicitly handled for you in other languages. At least the way you call super() now is a lot less kludgy.

One thing I miss a bit in Python is method overloading. In a general sense, function overloading is not an OOP feature per se, but I find it useful in OOP, particularly with object initializers. You can sort of achieve it with @functools.singledispatch but it's pretty janky. For initialization, I prefer keeping the __init__ method pretty rudimentary and writing factory functions to do more complex initializations. And with @dataclass, you can forego writing an __init__ altogether if you do it that way.

Ok, here's my question for an agoraphobe.

Let's say we one day decide to build a space colony, but it's sort of a one-way trip since the lower gravity would acclimatize your body in such a way that it would be difficult to ever return to Earth after several years on the Moon/Mars/wherever. And you would most likely live in an underground habitat where you would maybe make the occasional trip up to the surface to walk around outside, but it would be a hassle since you'd have to get all suited up. So most of the time you would be just chilling in your man cave or what have you.

As an agoraphobe, would you make the ideal pioneer on such a frontier?

For instance, if an AI model could complete a one-hour task with 50% success, it only had a 25% chance of successfully completing a two-hour task. This indicates that for 99% reliability, task duration must be reduced by a factor of 70.

This is interesting. I have noticed this myself. Generally, when an LLM boosts productivity, it shoots back a solution very quickly, and after a quick sanity check, I can accept it and move on. When it has trouble, that's something of a red flag. You might get there eventually by probing it more and more, but there is good reason for pessimism if it's taking too long.

In the worst case scenario where you ask it a coding problem for which there is no solution—it's just not possible to do what you're asking—it may nevertheless engage you indefinitely until you eventually realize it's running you around in circles. I've wasted a whole afternoon with that nonsense.

Anyway, I worry that companies are no longer hiring junior devs. Today's juniors are tomorrow's elites and there is going to be a talent gap in a decade that LLMs—in their current state at least—seem unlikely to fill.

My wife and I are hooked also. I bought the first book in the series and started reading it, but decided it's better to not get ahead of the plot, as every episode seems to end in a cliffhanger. (I don't think that's really necessary, as the show has enough pull to keep us coming back regardless.) I have a feeling though that once season 1 is done, I'm going to binge the novels.

Ok thanks I managed to subscribe eventually through the link: https://piefed.ca/f/allgames@piefed.social

There must be a more instance-agnostic way to do this though? 🤔 Something like !allgames@piefed.social maybe? Or is that more of a lemmy thing?

I'm new to piefed. Could someone explain how I can subscribe to these from piefed.ca?