You can make the tarp semi-translucent, so that it lets through just enough light to keep the tree alive, and produce a thin growth ring for that year.
For a long time there has been back chatter on how to turn programming into a more professional field, more like actual engineering where when something goes wrong actual people and companies start to take security seriously, and get held accountable for their mistakes, and start to actually earn their high salaries.
Getting AI to hallucinate its way into secure and better quality code seems like the antithesis of this. Why don't we have AI and robots working for humanity with the boring menial tasks - mowing laws, filing taxes, washing dishes, driving cars - instead of attempting to take on our more critical and creative outputs - image generation, movie generation, book writing and even website building.
The problem with this argument is that it's not what's going to happen. In the trajectory I see of LLM code generation, security quality between best-practices well-prompted (ie: not creatively well prompted, just people with a decent set of Instructions.md or whatever) and well trained human coders is going to be a wash. Maybe in 5 years SOTA models will clearly exceed human coders on this, but my premise is all progress stops and we just stick with what we have today.
But the analysis doesn't stop there, because after the raw quality wash, we have to consider things LLMs can do profoundly better than human coders can. Codebase instrumentation, static analysis, type system tuning, formal analysis: all things humans can do, spottily, on a good day but that empirically across most codebases they do not do. An LLM can just be told to spend an afternoon doing them.
I'm a security professional before I am anything else (vulnerability research, software security consulting) and my take on LLM codegen is that they're likely to be a profound win for security.
> Why don't we have AI and robots working for humanity with the boring menial tasks - mowing laws, filing taxes, washing dishes, driving cars
I mean, we do have automation for literally all of those things, to varying degrees of effectiveness.
There's an increasing number of little "roomba" style mowers around my neighborhood. I file taxes every year with FreeTaxUSA and while it's still annoying, a lot of menial "form-filling" labor has been taken away from me there. My dishwasher does a better job cleaning my dishes than I would by hand. And though there's been a huge amount of hype-driven BS around 'self-driving', we've undeniably made advances in that direction over the last decade.
"Its easier to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission."
There are many other well known mantras that i can't recall right now. SV and VC companies do not care in the slightest about users and their data - only about making more money (which these days always seems to involve stealing^Wwarehousing more and more data).
Its to level the playing field. Licensed national broadcasters already have to pay a fee which ends up supporting local news / content. International streamers charging money to Canadians for their attention do not currently pay this fee. It seems only fair that all broadcasters / streamers should have to pay the same fee to access the same market.
I have vague memories of it being a Microsoft thing to insert two spaces at the end of every sentence? I could be misremembering.
The bug here was not "begin" followed by two spaces, but rather its "begin" followed by some other text followed by two spaces, which if i recall correctly is exactly what Microsoft would auto-format your text to.
That says more about the web developers that you know than it does about Firefox.
Its anecdotal I know, but would have to say that I know more web devs who use Firefox as their daily driver (or use more than one browser), than those who use just Safari or Chrome only. The better web developers (better able to solve bugs, and write less error prone code) are the ones who don't use Chrome for everything.
