It probably did, but they didn't feel the need to fully explain why they were confident it was AI generated, since that's not the point of the article.
I think it’s pretty mature of the author to recognize that this is the way they (and most humans) work, rather than acting like they always have the ability to treat others with their absolute full capacity for respect.
It’s all a matter of perspective I suppose, and of course I understand why you say this, but no professional options trader I’ve ever met would speak in these terms.
I don't work in firmware at all, but I'm working next to a team now migrating an application from VMs to K8S, and they refer to the VMs as "bare metal" which I find slightly cringeworthy - but hey, whatever language works to communicate an idea.
I'm not sure I've ever heard bare metal used to refer to virtualized instances. (There were debates around Type 1 and Type 2 (hosted) hypervisors at one point but haven't heard that come up in years.
I am by no means an industry insider, but I’m skeptical of your claims about running a ln airline on tech from those eras. The visible side of airline IT (ticketing) perhaps, but surely there is a lot of behind the scenes software that facilitates the efficiency of operation (plane positioning, route planning, maintenance tracking) required to compete on price in the modern era.
It’s easy to complain about modern airlines (and I do), but it’s still true that’s never been cheaper to fly, and IT infrastructure is surely no small part of that.
I think the ticketing systems are probably the most modern parts of airlines. As far as I know, the tech that actually runs the plane does not change very often as it needs to go through approval processes.
The ticketing system might very well be the oldest.
AFAIK the very first large-scale commercial deployment of what we now call "distributed cloud apps" was SABRE, a ticket reservation system built back in 1960s, still in use today.
It’s not an article, it’s a live feed. They do this when a story is breaking to make it clear that they’re adding information as they learn of it, and to match the style of the rest of the internet generally.
It reduces (often repetitive) visual noise in code, which can make it more readable. I wouldn’t recommend using it in all cases, but it’s a good tool to have.
BlackRock did not buy “a” data center, it bought a data center company with 78 data centers. I have no comment on whether or not it was a good deal, but your framing is silly.
Java's biggest risk towards continued adoption, by far, is the culture surrounding it - old Java programmers and old Java programs continue to be needlessly verbose, even if the language now has the tools (pretty much) to be as terse as other popular, modern languages.
It's an uphill battle, but it might just climb the hill because it's still such a behemoth.
It all failed when .stream() appeared. Why make people use .stream() for functional programming, plus streams aren’t even reusable, I almost wish they invented a new operator based on an exotic UTF-8 character than those 9 extra characters. Fonts should have a ligature for .stream().
And now let’s talk about .collect(toList())…
And records which look like ugly beans…
Java is the land of the verbose. But it can probably be solved with 9 extra characters on every line.
Streams should be built in collections, not a .stream().map(…).toList() convolution. In know its incompatible with weird frameworks who already overloaded the .map() method, but well… let them recompile.
That was in 2008, we’d be happy by now; and Java had no qualms asking everyone to change the package names from javax’ to jakartax’ in Java 21, so they should have issued a java.collections package and deprecated the lists i java.utils.
If v’s type can be inferred, you don’t need to give that extra hint to the type checker, likewise for 1..5. And Java Streams’ toList produces an immutable list.
One benefit is that it makes these operations lazy. There are no intermediate lists created when you call a map on a stream. If map were a method in a list, it would need to return a new list. And if you have multiple such maps etc, it would create more such lists for each map invocation.
reply