I think that the wax and wane of confidence is a natural (and healthy) cycle to preserve.
You start knowing nothing, and have no confidence, then learn stuff and your confidence builds, then you capitalize on that (learning x confidence) by doing productive things, then you hit barriers that create confusion and break down your confidence, at which point you realize you knew nothing and start learning like a beginner again.
Unhealthy confidence does not have this pattern, whether it's low or high. Even "medium" confidence, IMO, signals some kind of rut that one is stuck in, which tends to stifle creativity.
This is a good comment explains why discussions so often are so painful.
I quite often get explained to me the things I already know, in long monologues. Even things that I have created, only having people explain them to me years later, but using terms somewhat incorrectly etc.
And then I'm probably also doing that to other people.
This is very encouraging! As I said in another comment, lack of confidence in opinions due to realizing the limits of knowledge feels debilitating. Glad to hear maybe it’s just the start of learning like a beginner again!
I would assume most websites would still set cookies even if you reject the consent, because the consent is only about not technically necessary cookies. Just because the website sets cookies doesn't tell you whether it respects you selection. Only if it doesn't set any cookies can you be sure, and I would assume that's a small minority of websites.
Yeah, I was thinking the same. I have two Dyson vacuum cleaners, one purchased about 9 years ago, and the other two years ago. Both are excellent, and I still use the old one for my basement.
This really depends on the failure modes. In general, humans fail in predictable, and mostly safe, ways. AIs fail in highly unpredictable and potentially very dangerous ways. (A human might accidentally drop a knife, an AI might accidentally stab you with it.)
I've never used LLMs for this, but as someone who's been through a lot of sports-related injuries, I find doctors more or less useless (except for prescribing painkillers and performing surgeries.)
No doctor or physio has ever been able to fix my chronic issues, and I've always had to figure them out myself through lots of self-study and experimentation.
> If it was pulled into Rust stdlib, that team would be stuck handling it, and making changes to any of that code becomes more difficult.
I think Rust really needs to do more of this. I work with both Go and Rust daily at work, Go has its library game down -- the standard library is fantastic. With Rust it's really painful to find the right library and keep up for a lot of simple things (web, tls, x509, base64 encoding, heck even generating random numbers.)
I disagree, as I see it Rust's core-lib should be to interact with abstract features (intrinsics, registers, memory, borrow-checker, etc), and std-lib should be to interact with OS features (net, io, threads). Anything else is what Rust excels at implementing, and putting them into stdlib would restrict the adoption of different implementations.
For example there are currently 3, QUIC (HTTP/3) implementations for rust: Quiche (Cloudflare), Quinn, S2N-QUIC (AWS). They are all spec compliant, but may use different SSL & I/O backends and support different options. 2 of them support C/C++ bindings. 2 are async, 1 is sync.
Having QUIC integrated into the stdlib wouuld means that all these choices would be made beforehand and be stuck in place permanently, and likely no bindings for other languages would be possible.
There's no single ordering -- it really depends on what you're trying to do, how long you're willing to wait, and what kinds of modalities you're interested in.
reply