Like, you might have someone working on something in a new codebase but misunderstanding the architecture or just going in the wrong direction in general and a review is the best way to correct course before getting too far in

I think the article is suggesting this person should be pair programmed with until they understand the architecture and can be trusted to contribute correctly, and I actually kind of agree - it always feels terrible to tell someone a PR they've worked on possibly for days is completely the wrong direction, and arguably this is already 'too far in' if they're going to need to essentially start again.

Intervening earlier in the process should lead to less wasted effort overall, but people often seem to treat pair programming like its two people at 50% efficiency, when it actually saves a lot of cycle time on reviewing code.

I didn't say programming is unecessary, and I'm a proffesional software engineer with a degree in computer science. When I say 'learn to code' is over I mean the pressure for anyone and everyone to learn to code because there are so many well paying software engineer jobs.

This era is over undoubtedly, because all the people who never really cared about software engineering and are just there to collect a paycheck are going to be replaced - but the profession of software engineering will still be necessary, and the abstract maths of computer science isn't going anywhere as a field of research.

'Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.'

Study computer science if you like it, it's never been about making good 'coders' or software engineers.

I don't think the number of software engineers will ever drop to zero, but the days of 'learn to code' to get a high paying job guaranteed are definitely over.

Any service you depend on in the modern world, you need to be asking yourself 'what will I do when this enshitifies itself'. And it is a when.

Short termism on all sides is destroying our society.

Reminds me of

Torpenhow Hill is a hill in Cumbria, England. Its name consists of the Old English ‘Tor’, the Welsh ‘Pen’, and the Danish ‘How’ - all of which translate to modern English as ‘Hill’. Therefore, Torpenhow Hill would translate as hill-hill-hill hill

This is 100% the answer, the only solution to the model decay from LLM outputs overwhelming the web is to start collecting data IRL.

This is also why companies like OpenAI are desperately investing in 'AI wearables' that no-one wants. They have to get the unpolluted data from somewhere, and recording real conversations will at least mostly have come from actual humans instead of AI.

Most likely in reference to a large number of NSFW video games being pulled from Steam and Itch.io after pressure from payment processors

The plot has already being discussed at length. I want to talk about quidditch.

Quick recap, in quidditch, scoring goals scores 10 or 20 points, catching the snitch scores 150 points, and ends the game. This effectively means that the only way a team can catch the snitch and lose is if they are over 150 points behind.

As a result of this, logically the seaker should not attempt to catch the snitch if the score is this unfavourable, meaning the game is always decided by the seaker, and nothing anyone else is doing remotely matters. Remember also we see the audience is rarely able to see what the seeker is doing from the stands.

Now you may say "what about the world cup in book 4, Krumm catches the snitch and still loses". This can only be attributed to Krumm got mad at his team, or maybe bored, otherwise he should just wait and see if his team can score a goal or two. If the other team's seaker catches the snitch you lose anyway, so why even try until it's going to win you the game? Maybe he was showing off to Hermione.

We also know for certain that this happens very rarely, as the odds given to the twins by Ludo Bagman are very high, leading to a big payout. Therefore quidditch is entirely decided by something that happens well out of sight of the audience, and would be terrible to watch or play.

As an aside, the rules around catching the snitch leading to a draw are never mentioned, but I assume they have some penalty shootout system

We were told he was fortified in a tunnel network surrounded by bodyguards and hostages as human shields, like some terrorist mastermind.

He is killed running alone from one bombed out house to another, by a soldier that didn't even recognize him.

Not saying he shouldn't have been killed, but it really shows the false pretenses under which this 'war' is being carried out.

Binary Large OBject

Basically any binary file, often objected to in open source repos because of the lack of source and 'openness'. See also the recent xz backdoor.

'I recently took a french class, and yet I don't even know half of these german words'

Not even Millennials see action against your employer as 'betrayal'. Company loyalty is dead, and this professor is out of touch.