Not as well as they can reason (or others can google) something as standardized as kubernetes. There’s just less context (in both senses of the term) needed to understand something running on a common substrate versus something bespoke, even if the bespoke thing is itself comprised of standardized parts.
For a project set up by a qualified engineer, there would be little difference to the end user in practice. The LLM would work out a solution with a negligible difference in speed. Maybe debugging would also be faster for the LLM without the abstraction layers and low level access?
Nope, these are no random dice rolls.
Some times are solved each run, a few - occasionally (so here would be meaningful to try a few times - and metrics of pass@1 and pass@3 would be different), but most are never solved.
The platform is being actively used to plan attacks on our government... at a certain point this becomes a liability to any party that enabled it. As it should.
Ignoring the the moral bankruptcy of the argument to begin with, he's someone who most people would consider a societal "loss" despite his views around alternative medicine.
Most of the other people weeded out of the gene pool by following quack medicine advice aren't pushing their views on others either.
(FWIW if Jobs had devoted an inordinate amount of time to encouraging his audience to follow quack cancer cures it would be a stain on his reputation but wouldn't diminish the value of his separate contributions to UX or consumer electronics)
It seems from the comments that this article rubs people the wrong way. This article might be getting grouped into a speech police category that is undeserved.
I think the intention of "in my culture" is to allay a fear in the listener. The speaker is worried that there is a strong expectation of change in the listener by stating something as an axiom. The speaker's hope is that the listener will see a possibility instead of a demand.
Some people think it should be obvious that what a person states should never be seen as a demand to conform. Some believe this is a necessary life skill, especially in business.
Some people are interested in finding ways of speaking in a more sensitive way in an era that seems to be embracing sensitivity.
Its interesting to me that both sides can see each other's ways of communicating as an affront, when it is likely not the intent on either side.
After using Redux for a while, I realized that I was creating a lot of boilerplate to essentially (1) update an immutable store and (2) pass that store's state to (a)sync callbacks that execute in serial before and after the store was updated.
"Dot prop" strings have proved to be an elegant solution to detect which props changed on the store. Usually this means doing a regex match in `shouldComponentUpdate`. We almost never use React's state anymore.
reply