The agent "personalities" and LLM workflow really looks like cargo-cult behavior. It looks like it should be better but we don't really have data backing this.
> If you truly care about the planet, don't have children.
That's a fallacy; people care about the planet precisely because of children. I don't care about the planet for its own sake; I care because of the humans who inhabit it and their future lives.
Also, humanity spent 100,000 years without flying around the globe, and I doubt they were all living hermit martyr lives.
At most places I've worked, we can still get things done when AWS/GCP/Azure/OCI are down. For my own selfhosted work, I'm more self-reliant. But I'm aware there are some companies who do 100% of their work within AWS/GCP/Azure/OCI and are probably 100% down when they go down. That's a consequence of how they decided to architect their apps, services and infrastructure.
Where I live, ballot are a piece of paper slipped into an envelope (not sealed). It's mandatory to take at least two different ballots before entering a voting booth. You can take a picture with one ballot inside the envelope and switch before leaving the booth.
Not only that but paper in a voting booth is so simple that anyone can check that it is done properly.
It may be a burdensome process, but very simple to understand. Every modernization of the process has major drawbacks.
– Electronic voting machines cannot be verified by just any voter, and the vote count is not transparent.
– Remote voting (even paper-based) does not guarantee freedom of choice: it cannot be ensured that the person is not under pressure at home, or even that it is truly that person who is voting.
- Voting alone in a private booth ensures that no one can verify who a person voted for. It is therefore difficult to buy votes, since it is impossible to confirm that a person followed any instructions.
The fact that any voter can verify and ensure that everything is conducted properly, without having to trust a third party, is essential to guaranteeing the integrity of the vote.
I've been using Django for the last 10+ years, its ORM is good-ish. At some point there was a trend to use sqlalchemy instead but it was not worth the effort. The Manager interface is also quite confusing at first. What I find really great is the migration tool.
Since Django has gained mature native migrations there is a lot less point to using SQLAlchemy in a Django project, though SQLAlchemy is undeniably the superior and far more capable ORM. That should be unsurprising though - sqlalchemy is more code than the entire django package, and sqlalchemy + alembic is roughly five times as many LOC as django.db, and both are similar "density" code.
It's called Symbiogenesis [0] and it's not at all a wild theory. But it's limited to cell components, not multiples organs fusing to create something as complex as a mammal.
reply