The glass-half-full here is it’s an incredible signal that one of the largest financial gateways in the world is _able_ to do this with current capabilities.
They are enforcing rigor, on agents, the same way they would on humans. Do people think Stripe's engineering team would have been able to progress if each individual (human | machine) employee was not under harness and guardrail, and just wrote code willy nilly according to their whims? Vibe coding is whimsical, agentic engineering is re-applying what brought and brings rigor to software engineering in general, just to LLM outputs. Of course, it's not only that and there are novel problem spaces.
Isn't there a rule against this - i.e. accusing commenters for using LLMs (the offensive language aside)? Implicitly there is [0], because I can't see how it adds to the conversation. So what if it sounds like an LLM? Soon you won't be able to tell the difference anyway, and all that will be left is some chance that you are correct. Comments should be judged their content merits, not on whether the commenter is native English speaker or not.
[0] > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but please don't be rigidly or generically negative.
They still need someone to review and hopefully QA every PR. I doubt it’s saving much time except maybe the initial debug pass of building human context of the problem. The real benefit here is the ability for the human swe to quickly context switch between problems and domains.
But again: the agent can only move as fast as we can review code.
So anything that uses a less popular language is considered over engineering? Distros support lots of different languages already and there are likely other packages built with zig already.
A 50-ish MB build time dependency that doesn't need any special privileges or installation to run? That's over engineering? A binary release of just CMake is bigger than all of Zig.
Where he encouraged people to lean into intentionality and finding purpose rather than using therapy as a replacement?
I have a diagnosed anxiety disorder and I’ve benefited GREATLY from talk therapy in numerous ways. I’m an advocate for therapy. I simultaneously stand behind his post as a healthy nudge for many.
I don't think people in CS should be giving broad overly simplistic mental health advice. Let's leave that to the pros. I'm grateful of DHH's contributions to society but his hot takes are marketing ploys. Mental health should not be leveraged as a marketing ploy.
Fwiw, I struggled with anxiety and depression for nearly 20 years. Commitment to therapy and my modalities brought me out of that. My _therapist_ guided me, including finding purpose and building meaningful relationships.
I’ve never felt like “throw everything into a queue” was a mindset within the Ruby community, nor have we done that at my companies. And multi-region is a business decision.
Resque was a staple for a long long time. In the jvm world, throw everything into Kafka is also a staple of a lot of "enterprise" shops. Or SQS for AWS places I've worked at. I think it is not a ruby language thing, but a certain kind of architecture thing.
True that it is not uncommon to use Sidekiq or Resque , but Rails 8 is going to be the first version to ship with a queuing system (SolidQueue), later this year. So queueing has been an add-on for 20 years. I don't think it is quite a staple.
Rails 8 came out in November, and `rails new` generates an app with the solid trio in the Gemfile. Been fun playing around with it for new side projects :)
It does have a GIL. You’re not wrong, but by that same logic, there’s pitfalls when using multi-threading as well, even in languages where it’s native (e.g., Elixir).
Regardless, in my experience, when you run into scenarios that need queueing, multi-threading, etc., you need to know what you’re doing.
Look, you can insist that a 1440p monitor can only show blurry text all you like, but the problem that people are talking about is that the text is even blurrier than that.
I have native 1440p 120Hz on my main screen which is more than 30inches across (ultrawide). I can see pixels if I look close enough, but I do not see any pixels at usual reading distance.
I have used retina displays of various sizes -- but after a while I just set them down to half their resolution usually (i.e. I do not use the 200% scaling from the OS, rather set them to be 1440p (or lower on 13inch laptops)). I have not seen an advantage to retina displays.
Text on 1440p looks great with full hinting and subpixel rendering. Unfortunately, macOS does neither, so the jump to retina feels more significant than it is.
Biggest draw for me with 1440p 32" is being the same DPI as a 1080p 24". I like to have one big monitor and then 2 small flank vertical monitors and having them all be the same DPI just makes headaches go away on every operating system I use them with.
Maybe a comparison to AWS Global Accelerator would be helpful to understand the "global" aspect. Having instances in multiple regions is just a starting point.
Ahhh got it, this is focusing primarily on load balancing at a lower layer of routing then than what I'm referring to. While not wrong, "global load balancing" threw me off a bit.
EDIT: see the other reply, appears that it handles both given it leverages Fly's Anycast setup.
Personally, this is exciting.