Republicans have been the ones arguing that businesses don't have to do business with anyone for any reason. Are you saying they don't believe that standard should apply to Trump? If so, that sounds like hypocrisy to me.
I think this is an OK standard for small privately owned businesses... like a bakery, a mechanics shop, etc. Obviously the rules would be different for services that are required and necessary. Ie. a telephone company, national ISP's, hospitals, banks, etc. Especially banks that received government bail-out funds. So, it's different to me.
Conservatives have argued that healthcare providers shouldn't have to provide healthcare to people with whom they differ ideologically. I say they should be careful what the wish for.
Not quite. Conservatives argue they shouldn’t have to provide medical practices like abortion that violate their personal ideologies. They don’t selectively grant them for a subset of the population.
Michael Abrash - there's a name I haven't heard in a while! I remember his book back in the 90s Zen of Code Optimization completely changed how I looked at assembly language programming. I can easily imagine him doubling the Quake framerate!
I immediately remembered myself writing birthday congrats with LLMs and myself pushing every email through Claude, putting linguistic perfection over authenticity.
Being charitable, one could argue that you spent extra time because you cared - which, hopefully, is what your friends are doing. Some people send sympathy cards from Hallmark for the same reason - to express what they find difficult to express. Is it really any different? Something to think about in this age of LLMs.
I'm old enough to remember when this wasn't the case. Compilers back in the 80s and even early 90s had bugs. Heck, even Intel processors had bugs!
The bigger problem though with treating LLMs as a compiler is they're non-deterministic. The same prompt can generate two different outputs at two different times. One may be correct, the other may have subtle bugs. In the end, we should be focusing on what we should have been focusing on all along: what evidence do I have that this code is correct?
