Highly valuable right now with how high leverage it can make a good engineer. Who knows for how long.

I think discord became popular in the first place because it was so much better than the alternatives, at least for the gaming/ hanging out with friends use case. Discord was initially competing with a bunch of self hosted stuff, vent/ mumble etc with higher barrier to entry and less features and Skype which was terrible.

Discord really became big because it had 0 obstacle onboarding. In an age of Skype, Ventrillo, Teamspeak and Mumble, all "installation" software with "server addresses" and "setup your user config", Discord shows up, says "press this link", and done, you're ready to go. Install link? No, it's in the browser. Account? No, you literally got a temp account made for you. You just talked. Yes, with a button in the corner that says "Claim this account" which just wants an email and a name, but point is, you didn't even have to do that much. This is why the comparison to it is IRC despite the two being so far apart, IRC was the only other chat software with this small of a barrier to entry.

Everything else about the featureset was copy pasted from Slack. No one cares about that part.

Not easy though, the US has to basically allow it.

Did the US allow all the other nuclear countries to develop nuclear weapons? There are quite a few states that could easily and quickly develop their own nuclear deterrent and the US is in a much worse position now to deter them from that.

Tell that to Iran.

The current administration WANTS Europe to develop the military necessary to defend themselves so we don’t have to pay for it. We’ll probably send them the schematics if they haven’t already infiltrated whatever servers we keep them on.

What if France 'donated' some nukes to every EU country (okay, maybe not Hungary) ?

It won't happen, but I wonder what could the US possibly do about it.

Nothing. We could and would do nothing. If we wanted to do something, it would be sanctions. We’re not so far gone as to invade Europe.

The problem is they’d have to donate delivery systems too and I believe the only part of the triad they have is submarines.

Most European countries simply couldn’t use it. But some could.

Assuming these end up in open source code llms will learn about them that way.

And assuming people want deeper integration is the browser even the right level of abstraction? Arguably it would be better to have something that was operating at the OS level, like siri/gemini assistant style.

When Microsoft completely integrates its LLM into Windows, would you rather give that access to your browser, or would you rather plug in your own local model / turn it off entirely while browsing?

If a global LLM becomes standard, I'd want to plug in my own local model or disable it entirely, but I don't think Microsoft nor Apple are going to open up their operating systems and make it easy to do that any time soon. The option to granularly use your own models is a plus to me in that situation.

Every app has to open itself for integration, especially if it's not a native app like Firefox. From where they get the AI at the end doesn't really matter, they will support them all anyway.

Precisely. Like the winner could be in 100 spaces, but more likely going to be something global.

To include discord you have to extend it to messaging services. To include Roblox it should be all online games with chat.

When I was a kid, online games with chat were a no-no. Most of the ones designed for kids specifically avoided having a chat feature aside from preset phrases, like Toon Town.

Then of course by teens, most boys were in the notorious MW2 lobbies.

Ok that's fine. These two platforms are where kids are being groomed.

Yeah the example they gave does feel like pretty isolated unit test territory, or at least an integration test on a subset of the system that could be ran in isolation.

Go does have iterators: https://pkg.go.dev/iter

Thanks! Did not see this until your message, looking forward to make use of this

It would be a waste of time to develop right now, if it isn't on starship it would be a dead end in terms of progress. So they are better off just waiting until starship can be sent.

Was it actually a cut or was it not renewing something that was expiring? A bill to fund the government seems like the wrong place to be debating new spending.

I don’t know what the news rhetoric on all of this is, I haven’t seen it mentioned on here or on news articles, and I’m not on the socials/don’t watch tv. IIRC the initial ACA bill always had this cliff in order to make the numbers work for the bill to pass.

Like most long-term financial bills, everyone just assumed the cliff won’t hit and new legislation will pass.

This is the actual crux, no? “We expected the funny numbers to pass again” as opposed to “we should have addressed this before Biden left office”