Thank you for this. I think Niehues has been incredibly prolific and successful, but also his marketing of himself as sort of the originator and one true purveyor of this style has been even more successful.
> This is somewhat unsurprising, as code review … may not provide immediate value to the person reviewing (or their employer).
If you get “credit” for contributing when you review, maybe people (and even employers, though that is perhaps less likely) would find doing reviews to be more valuable.
Not sure what that looks like; maybe whatever shows up in GitHub is already enough.
Honestly, the same phenomenon is a problem inside companies as well. My employer credits review quality and quantity relatively well (i.e., in annual performance review), but it still isn't a strong enough motivator to really get the rate up to a satisfactory level.
I want this for my personal agent project, too! (Well really I want it for Opus…) I hope it isn’t just “who you know” that determines whether you can use your codex sub.
I don’t know that the vast majority of Americans know who Eric Schmidt is. And unless they find little green men, no one will care about this project, so it won’t affect his (essentially nonexistent) reputation.
It’s not unlike if you had a blog post about a gardening project in your backyard. Perhaps interesting to gardeners, but approximately no one cares.
There's a book that describes what Christians believe about the life of Jesus Christ, and is used by most Christian priests to illustrate and reinforce their homilies and lessons to their lay folk. The same book is widely read by many denominations of Christians as a source of insight into the religious intent of Jesus Christ, even if the conclusions they draw from it may vary.
There are also other books written by both lay authors and those with theological credentials that seek to describe what a "good" Christian should believe and do, though to be fair, none of them are universal across the Christian faith (*).
No such work exists for "secularists".
(*) though fair enough, even "The Bible" doesn't entirely meet that standard given disagreements between both the high level denominations (Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant) and the subdivisions within each.
Because the Bible is not a single book but a complex arrangement of at least 66 books (Roman Catholic Bibles include another seven books that Protestants do not recognize) written over many years by multiple authors, the question concerning versions can be complicated.
One major division is stems from Old Testament versions; Roman Catholic Bibles are all derived from the Septuagint version (3rd Century BC translation of original Hebrew scriptures into Koine Greek) of the Old Testament, whereas Protestant Bibles returned to the original Hebrew texts.
There are over 450 known versions of the Bible in English alone.
While there are estimates of several thousand distinct christian dennominations, the *major* categories are Catholic (50.1%), Protestant (36.7%), Orthodox, including Eastern and Oriental communions (11.9%), Other (1.30%).
I don't mean to nitpick, I grew up in one of the last "remote areas" of the planet and we were inundated with missionaries (when listed (now not) we had at least a hundred different types of christian mission here) that all had beliefs that only superficially appeared similar.
One wing of my larger extended family is fractured by a run of Christian brothers and sisters all raised catholic, all with military service, and all progressing to different barely compatible denominations and scarcely talking since.
> No such work exists for "secularists".
Secularists also have at least 66 books to draw on for morals, ethics, and common human values. It's debatable whether a book is even required to act with cooperation and respect with most others.
Exactly, the whole point is it wouldn’t take 30 minutes (more like 3 hours) if the tooling didn’t change all the fucking time. And if the ecosystem wasn’t a house of cards 8 layers of json configuration tall.
Instead you’d learn it, remember it, and it would be useful next time. But it’s not.
I never understood this complaint. You won’t get a “loop trace” when you convert your tail calls into an iterative algorithm. And your code will be less readable to boot.
V8 team decided that it's not worth it, since proper stack traces (such as Error.stack) are essential for some libraries, such as Sentry (!). Removing some stack trace info can break some code. Also, imagine you have missing info from the error stack trace in production code running on NodeJS. that's not good. If you need TCO, you can compile that code in WASM. V8 does TCO in WASM.
Most Bun users don't even know about this (unless they are bitten by this). That doesn't mean absolutely no one cares or would not care even though such complaints might be uncommon.
reply