• 0 Posts
  • 303 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 1st, 2026

help-circle
  • Fine, but most people talk about AI, and AI datacenter, and AI coding to refer to LLM, so it is what I use, well knowing we are talking about LLM. And while I grant you that the entire software development world is not ready for LLM, having spent decades optimizing for people writing software, there is a lot that we learned in the last year of consistent use applied to software development.

    LLM exhibiting true intelligence or the appearance of intelligence is inconsequential if the final result mimics the reasoning capabilities of humans working on software.


  • I use AI at work. The use of AI requires knowledge and projects structured around the use of AI. If you do it properly, AI code is much better (100% clean code architecture adherence, tdd with >90% coverage, deploy gates on quality and security, easy dependency upgrade). Since we started using AI properly our codebase quality skyrocketed. Less bugs, more features, less insecure code. You do not know how to use AI properly. That is fine, most don’t, we are discovering how to use a new tool that change every week now. That does not mean the problem is the tool.




  • The entire certification process of the components used in nuclear is a mess in Europe.

    Parts needs to be certified multiple times for multiple entities, and the same is true for each component used in building those parts. Each country in Europe has different regulations, so the same design needs to be adapted and recertified so it is always the first of a kind. The process is done multiple times during construction as the criteria changes with continuous renegotiating and amendments to the contracts.

    That makes the costs explode. Nuclear in China is as safe and costs 3 to 7 times less. The difference is know how (they never stopped building), standardization and scale.


  • Nuclear is expensive, but lot of those expense are unnecessary self inflicted burocracy. We know already how to make something cheap and safe, like we do in aerospace. It is about wanting to do it. Nuclear works at night. Natural gas cannot be the alternative. Battery could be, but as of now the technology is not ready, even more expensive for long term storage and cannot scale fast enough.

    We can make nuclear the way forward for a century at least (not because of lack of fuel, that is not an issue, really). It is just understanding if we want to for the right reasons. It is a political issue, not a technical one.












  • more like: “pools after 2022 are clearly false (over 100% turnout), made at gunpoint (supporting Ukrainian territorial integrity is a crime in Russia, and voting was not private but door-to-door), with incredible selection bias (40% of the population, mostly those that did not want to be under Russian occupation fled) and no international observer”

    It is really .ml bias that the united nations (who certified Dunbas elections as illegal 143 in favour, 5 against, Belarus, North Korea, Nicaragua, Russia and Syria) are always wrong, but the Russian government, a dictatorship with proven demonstrable fake elections, invading other countries since forever, is somewhat right, even when they have clear vested interest in lying all the time.

    It must be a strange sensation to let go of logic in such a deep way that Russia propaganda makes sense to you.



  • Now imperialist military conquest is called “liberation”. Doublespeak at his finest.

    People in lugansk wanted to be part of Ukraine. In 2014, the last reliable pool showed 70% of the interviewed wanting to be part of Ukraine.

    In general what people in lugansk wanted was being part of an independent Ukraine with extensive regional autonomy and frictionless economic integration with Russia. What they got is invasion from Russia, coercive legal assimilation, property confiscation, human abuses, forced conscription.