This is a short article summarizing a research paper at the surface level. It is clearly the last nail in the coffin for the generative AI grand marketing claims. Of course, I recommend reading the actual research paper (link at the end) but if you prefer this very short form, here it is. It's clearly time to go back to the initial goals of the AI field: understanding cognition. The latest industrial trends tend to confuse too much the map with the territory.

We keep saying they're not the same. This article does a good job highlighting the differences and explaining why you need both.

Or why we shouldn't trust marketing survey... they definitely confuse perception and actual results. Worse they do it on purpose.

If you still needed to be convinced you need to use std::array and std::span, here is the proof.

Unsurprisingly the productivity gains announced for coding assistants have been greatly exaggerated. There might be cases of strong gains but it's still unclear in which niches this is going to happen.

Maybe extrapolating a bit more than it should. Still this leads to worrying uses of AI generated images.

Interesting analysis... I wonder if and how Jevons paradox will get in the way though.

I definitely agree with this. I'm sick of the grand claims around what is essentially a parlor trick. Could we tone down the marketing enough so that we can properly think about making useful products again?

This one is definitely a bad one. Looks like CUPS is a weak part of the ecosystem, especially when coupled with zeroconf. I wouldn't be surprised to see macOS being affected too.

More details about the KIA security issue. Clearly securing the embedded systems is not worth much if it is then all exposed via unsafe web services.

Good idea on how product managers should behave to facilitate requirements handling. I wish more of them would do this.

This could be a game changer to collaborative editing. Clearly a good competitor to CRDTs, should make it easier to build such features without a central server.

An excellent service to provide. Let's hope it stays sustainable, the risk is commercial leeches not giving back a dime. Be responsible, sponsor it if you use it commercially.

They're trying a come back... of course they added layers of security to pretend it's all solved and shiny. They totally ignore the social implications or if something like this even needs to be done. At least one can remove it... for now...

I'm obviously not in love with the complexity this type of architecture brings. That being said, this thesis brings an interesting approach to better detect failure scenarios in such systems.

Ooh! This looks like a really neat improvement. I wonder how reliable this is, I'll definitely test it.

Could we just stop connecting cars with web access for features we don't really need? Please?

Nice short post about cohesion in software design. Also gives clue about what proxy we can use to gauge this cohesion.

Excellent proof of why you don't want to "rewrite it all in Rust". It's important to respect the old code and focus on applying safety practices on the new code. This is also why the upcoming changes to C++ are worth it, it might improve the interoperability factor almost for free.

It was to be expected that complaints against Mozilla could happen in Europe. They've been asking for it lately...