And the basis of his statement is not even accurate. Our record of direct temperature measurements is short, on a geological scale. However, we have other means of inferring the temperature in the past.

Reply was intended for the previous post. Oops.

I guess you do not know how tank water heaters work.

No one said we were going to have boiling oceans.

You may need to get a dictionary and look up the terms âoeleftist,â âoecommunism,â and âoenatural disaster.â I am not sure you know what they mean.

Oh! Somebody should tell the scientists! None of them even considered that possibility!

Did you even read the summary? It literally said that there multiple factors, and some of them are human-caused climate change.

And if you want proof, just try to get any game written for the 8086, 8088, or 80286 to run at the correct speed under DOSBox. I dare you.

The fact that you have said "nothing substantive has changed" completely disqualifies your opinion as woefully misinformed. It is that, or you simply are too emotional about Java to have an objective opinion. So go on, stay in your corner plugging away with Haskell or whatever, and I will stay in mine writing software that runs businesses.

Yes, but that is not an OO an OO problem. That is a bad programmer problem.

And, the hate on OOP is almost entirely undeserved. There is very little evidence that OO code is buggier than code written following any other paradigm. And OO languages are borrowing concepts from non-OO languages where it makes sense, like immutables, and null safety.

When was the last time you took a look at Java? Java is competitive against Rust and C++ web frameworks in raw performance. It DOES tend to consume more memory, but spending more on hardware is a rational compromise when considering the market of available Java developers versus Rust or < insert pet language here >.

I am not convinced that it will automate away all developer jobs. I think that at some level humans will be involved. Even if we are not doing the code monkey grunt work, we will still be guiding the process. If you think about it, from the perspectives of the users and product owners, there isnâ(TM)t much practical difference between AI and developers. They in theory define their requirements, some work happens somewhere, and then a deliverable is produced that may or may not meet your requirements. The product owners in my experience are incredibly bad at defining or even actually understanding their own requirements, and half the job of the development team is just in figuring out how to translate poor and vague requirements to what the owners really need.

When you say &quot:properly prompted," what kind of person does it take to "properly" prompt GPT? I think that person is a developer.

I agree with this. I have seen many uninformed opinions from people proclaiming the end of software development because they could get ChatGPT to generate what is equivalent to a mid-semester compsci homework assignment. Do not get me wrong. ChatGPT and Copilot are incredible timesavers, but they are not developers and will not be replacing me soon. I do think they will force out of the market those who refuse to leverage them AI tools. A skilled developer with AI assistance will be able to produce quality code more quickly than one without. The required skill will be that a good developer can sort out the difference between good and bad generated code, or code that does not fit within the context of the rest of the application.