I don't know. I'm torn over this. This could well be the future - not fully coding by AI, but commonly using AI to assist.

I've built an arithmetic logic unit using NAND gates. I've programmed in assembler. I've programmed in-line assembler in C programs. Sure, I have a good appreciation on what happens at a low level, but is that really relevant today? What benefit does someone starting today have if they know this sort of stuff?

Everyone today uses frameworks, huge libraries of pre-built functions, IDE's that refactor and lots of other magic that back in the day, editing C code in vi, I couldn't even dream of. I remember using Borland C for the first time when it was new, and being amazed at what the IDE could do, and how it improved my productivity.

Progress happens, we have to move with the times. If someone can complete the task, and uses some wiz-bang IDE with AI integration - then as long as what they create is fit for purpose, does it really matter that they have never soldered a circuit board?

95% is not decimation but annihilation. Use the right word.

Biden's policies were trying to help them become accountable for our tax dollars, something you would think would be important in the age of DOGE.

It's causing linux on the desktop to become a thing.

Getting rick back is a major thing.

is there a way to know when the AI is losing the thread of conversation before it drops the ball?
can you monitor the context window?

I think it would also be an issue that when the a coronal mass ejection comes around at sufficient magnitude that your stupid orbital datacenter is in the path of, it would cook absolutely everything inside of it and your business is now done, and all of your customers are pissed off.

It's not like Cisco manufactures readymade radiation-hardened switches, and Dell doesn't make shielded blade computing chassis to my knowledge. And getting an on-site service call is a real bitch.

There's a reason satellites are so god damn expensive. Off-the-rack hardware isn't used in space applications by-and-large for good reasons.

Minnesota banned use of such recently too.

...here is someone that used a computer, built a YT channel with all the work that goes into the media creation, then was able to buy a "playground/film area, whatever" and setup a subscription video on demand on his own. That's really quite awesome and something you could only dream of 30 years ago.

What could possibly go wrong?

I do have problems with Git: Rebase, squash merge etc. Because the real history is hard to visualise, people rewrite history, destroying the underlying information needed to do merges correctly, removing commits from history completely - commits you might want to keep because it might point to a version, where you code worked well. Why have the git community not added information to make a nice history overview instead of hacking the otherwise well functioning commit graph?