We've somehow lucked out with our stupid interview programming test. It is the most basic and dumb thing possible: an HTML based fizzbuzz. Candidates come up with some really elaborate solutions and present their work beautifully. Then we ask them to make some changes in real-time. You know, like, change a color. Add some inputs to control the factors. How do you approach a change in requirements? What I've been noticing is that people are delegating everything to LLMs and have no idea at all how their program works. They instantly get lost trying to figure out how to add an input to an HTML page, or change the output. The more elaborate the solution, the more they struggle to find out where anything is.

The success of DA:O killed BioWare. EA basically mandated DA:2 to come out in a year; they had aspirations of a yearly RPG series. This, obviously, did not go well internally, and most of the studio ended up leaving due to the crunch and overwork. It was all downhill from there.

For the past half year every patch Tuesday is like cutting the red wire; you never know if it will cause the bomb to explode. The March patch Tuesday is the one that finally did me in. It wrecked the whole network stack. DISM couldn't repair its image, even with physical media. Every attempt I made at fixing things just made it worse. I finally had to completely reformat my whole PC and start from scratch (luckily, I had just completed a NAS so I was able to back stuff up).

The problem with making a moral argument is that we (the US) famously have zero morals.

Firefox on Android with the Video Background Play Fix extension still works, and probably won't stop working.

I doubt games will ever bother with direct support now that Proton works so well. Devs aren't going to release open-source versions of their game engines, and they aren't going to provide and support compiled versions for a dozen different popular distros. The glibc problem makes it really difficult to release binaries for Linux, and many of the containerized packages have performance hits or require external configuration due to their security model. It is just so much simpler to target Windows and make sure it runs in Proton/Wine.

I could honestly believe that they thought the "no generative AI" rule was about using it in the final product. The IGA clarifying that the rule means that you can't use genAI during the course of the whole game's *development* is insane since any developer using GitHub Copilot instantly disqualifies the game. I would bet that most of the entrants should technically be disqualified, but you'll never see anybody cop to using Copilot.

No, it definitely is a gray area. You right-click and see "Ask an AI Chatbot" in the menu? Some people here count that as not being opt-in and invasive because they can see the option, even if it doesn't do anything until you set it up or click the button to remove it. Hell, some people here on Slashdot will bitch and moan if the browser so much as pops up a hint asking if you want to enable some LLM feature. Even ASKING if you want to opt-in is too much for some people.

Some people think that they should not even be aware that a feature exists unless you search for it in the settings menu and enable it. That is "opt-in" for them. And for others, they don't view the browser exposing a feature stub or informing the user about a new feature as "opt-in" if you still need to take action to both enable and use the feature.

It sounds like this "kill-switch" is to placate the first group of people who don't even want to know the feature exists. It will most likely remove all of the dormant feature stubs entirely and the browser won't tell them about the features at all. I think that is perfectly okay.

It's pretty amateurish to introduce memory vulnerabilities with the "unsafe" keyword when there are perfectly memory safe ways to add memory vulnerabilities to your code (https://github.com/Speykious/cve-rs)

We shouldn't be giving kids iPads and Chromebooks in school. Every year there seems to be a new article about how kids have trouble getting jobs because they don't know how to even use Word on a Windows laptop. The basic corporate standard. We need to bring back the computer labs. Teach kids what they -actually- need to know.

I clicked on that and uBlock flagged it as badware. I looked into it and apparently it was bought by "LimeWire" earlier in the year and is uploading your files to the cloud. I would use one of the forks or alternatives like PairDrop instead of that.

It still upsets me that Swype is still the best keyboard, and that it can't really be used on modern Android anymore. No other keyboard I've found has embraced the extremely useful shortcuts that keyboard had. Did a word get completely mangled and you want to retype it? Tap the word and then double-tap the Swype symbol and it would select the whole word and let you try again. It is such a pain to do that on basically everybody other keyboard on Android. Copy/paste having shortcuts was also extremely useful (so you didn't have to attempt to long press on an input field), and having shortcuts around punctuation like 's and ? made it much easier to use proper English. It's just sad.

How is that relative? It literally won't do anything unless you trigger it to generate the preview. If you've chosen to generate a preview of a link, you've chosen to visit that link, and that is entirely on you.

It's not even that. It's a simple web page FizzBuzz test (print the numbers 1-100 on a web page when you click a button and do FizzBuzz-like things). We give them a day to do it and tell them that we will review what they write in the technical interview. People create elaborate solutions to impress, but I've noticed certain... trends in how they design it. And after the review, when we ask them to make it so the FizzBuzz factors are user editable on the web page, things always end up falling apart.

We provide a technical test in our interview process and we got all sorts of neat submissions but it always falls apart when we ask them to make changes live. I personally don't care much about somebody using an LLM if they can demonstrate that they are skilled enough without using one, and if they can demonstrate that they won't trust a result. In fact, at this point we ask about AI usage and have applicants ask it questions that we know will give wrong answers just to see if they can identify the problem and figure out how to resolve it.