I was driving home with my family from a long trip having just bought a really cool camping trailer, a 1979 Airstream. Our vehicle died on the side of the road in a rural area. The owner of the property where we stopped was mowing his lawn and came over and asked if we needed help. When it became obvious our vehicle needed a tow, he used his own truck to bring the trailer onto his property. And he kept it there for a couple of weeks while the engine in our vehicle was replaced.

I'm really not sure what I would have done with the trailer if he hadn't offered to help. We were more than 600 km from home.

I'm an avid HTMX user but never did I ever think "I'm using so many includes, I wish I didn't have to use include so much."

What I would like is a way to cut down the sprawl of urls and views.

I do a check for `request.htmx` in my views and conditionally return a template partial as needed. This reduced my need for one-off view functions that were only returning partials for htmx. Works pretty well from my experience.

This is a great quote for the topic, but the quote is normally about a bridge that barely stands.

I'm chuckling at the thought of barely building something. (All in good fun, thank you.)

I distinctly recall early in my first university programming courses the instructor saying something to the effect of "Just wait until you learn 'public static void main'". I think we had only used BlueJ until that point in the course.

As someone who previously led development of a commercial VPN system, I assure you, there are about 100 ways for a VPN to go slower than the network hosting it. Unfortunately.

Two cases I can think of are MTU misconfigurations and constrained CPU on either endpoint, where the node CPU can handle non-VPN network demands but can't handle the VPN demand.

> The rapid growth of revenue of AI model companies, OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.

You can't use growth of AI companies as evidence to refute the article. The premise is that it's a bubble. The growth IS the bubble, according to the claim.

> I don't know why the author of TFA claims that he can't make a bunch of one-off apps

I agree... One-off apps seem like a place where AI can do OK. Not that I care about it. I want AI that can build and maintain my enterprise B2B app just as well as I can in a fraction of the time, and that's not what has been delivered.

Bubbles are born out of evaluations, not revenue. Web3 was a bubble because the money its made wasn't real productivity, but hype cycles, pyramid schemes, etc. AI companies are merely selling API calls, there is no financial scheming, it is very simply that the product is worth what it is being sold for.

> I want AI that can build and maintain my enterprise B2B app just as well as I can in a fraction of the time, and that's not what has been delivered.

AI isn't at that level yet but it is making fast strides in subsets of it. I can't imagine systems of models and the models themselves won't reach there in a couple years given how bad AI coding tools were just a couple years ago.

Does the revenue cover the costs?

Tufte also had a lot to say about the Challenger disaster, which predates Powerpoint but not the visual display of information.

Found the chapter here: https://williamwolff.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/tufte-ch...

With regards to wrapping your head around heat loss- this winter some work was done on our property while there was snow on the ground. A bunch of snow got covered in dirt. In the spring, maybe three weeks after all the snow on the ground had melted, I moved the pile and was surprised to find all the snow still frozen. It had been under maybe 18 inches of dirt. I was pretty surprised to see it.

Their own tools would need the various API keys, of course, and they did build a method to filter out those variables and managed most user code through it, but it sounds like they forgot to put Rubocop through the special method.

So this researcher may have gotten lucky in choosing to dig into the tool that CodeRabbit got unlucky in forgetting.

It sounds like a pretty bad approach in general to have to "filter out the bad stuff" on a case-by-case basis. It should be as simple as launching everything from a sanitized parent environment, and making it impossible to launch any tool otherwise. Or better, make that sanitized environment the default and make privileged operations be the thing that jumps through hoops to talk to a bastion/enclave/whatever that holds the actual keys.

Yes although somewhere there will be an `if` statement to determine if the process being started should get the complete environment or a key to get the other keys or whatever. Best to make that `if` at the highest level of the architecture as possible and wrapped in something that makes it obvious, like a `DangerousUserCodeProcess` class.

The only other safety I can think of is a whitelist, perhaps of file pathnames. This helps to maintain a safe-by-default posture. Taking it further, the whitelist could be specified in config and require change approval from a second team.

As a teenager I did about 4.5 minutes, as I recall, in a bucket of water. I played the trumpet quite a bit at the time, so I think my capacity was above average. It was a competition and I got first, and the second place fellow was also a trumpet player.

All three of us trumpet players in my middle school band would sit in the back and have breath holding contests while the director was working with other sections or whatever.

In middle school, I was a swimmer on two teams and played trombone. We had a fun little “who can play the longest note” contest…everyone thought I cheated because I lasted about 30 seconds longer than anyone else. Really wasn’t that hard once you find the right position to use minimal air output, since the game wasn’t who could hold the same note, but any note. We regularly trained on the swim team to go as far as possible underwater in an Olympic pool — record on our team was 4 or 5 round-trips if I recall correctly (can’t remember 100%…long ago…but that kid was crazy in both speed and time underwater).

Pretty demoralizing to be labeled a cheater after such hard work expanding lung capacity and efficiency. After that, I wouldn’t even try anymore just so I wouldn’t be called a cheater again. Quit band the next year.

I wonder if circular breathing would work, or works, for trombone. If so you could have held that note "forever" with some training.

It should given that it works with trumpet (and even voice). I remember listening to some jazz piece on the radio where the DJ, before the song, alerted listeners to the long note that was being held and suggested trying holding your breath for the length of the note (but not—he warned—if you were driving).

It would, which was exactly what I was accused of but wasn’t something I knew how to do…even to this day. I have an idea of the mechanics, I just lack the ability because it has never been something I’ve practiced or developed.