I’ve used it most extensively for non-professional projects, where if I wasn’t using this kind of tooling to write tests they would simply not be written. That means no tickets to close either. That said, I am aware that the AI is almost always at best testing for regression (I have had it correctly realise my logic is incorrect and write tests that catch it, but that is by no means reliable) Part of the “hand holding” I mentioned involves making sure it has sufficient coverage of use cases and edge cases, and that what it expects to be the correct is actually correct according to intent.

I essentially use the AI to generate a variety of scenarios and complementary test data, then further evaluating it’s validity and expanding from there.

I most often just get it straight up misunderstanding how the test framework itself works, but I’ve definitely had it make strange decisions like that. I’m a little convinced that the only reason I put up with it for unit tests is because I would probably not write them otherwise haha.

I think its most useful as an (often wrong) line completer than anything else. It can take in an entire file and just try and figure out the rest of what you are currently writing. Its context window simply isn’t big enough to understand an entire project.

That and unit tests. Since unit tests are by design isolated, small, and unconcerned with the larger project AI has at least a fighting change of competently producing them. That still takes significant hand holding though.

I knew something was wrong but I didn’t put the dots together until my early 20s. I’d definitely had “I wanna be a girl” thoughts as a kid/teen but wasn’t super aware that being trans was a thing so shoved them to the back of my brain and allowed myself to just kinda feel broken instead.

“Oh shit I’m a girl?”

Fifth, they could simply write checks to Treasury that help us finance global public goods.

You have to be fucking kidding me.

I’ve been on HRT for ~4 years now. You need to give it more time. Whoever told you it took a couple weeks was pretty off. Personally, it was at the 3-6 month mark that my emotions began to “widen” I guess, and the quality of my attraction change. It took around a year (so, after the feminizing hormones had been affecting my body for a while) for me to begin feeling different about myself, to feel happier about my body.

It takes time, I know that sucks, but the changes will come.

• !trans@lemmy.blahaj.zone (I moderate there ;))
• !mtf@lemmy.blahaj.zone
• !ftm@lemmy.blahaj.zone
• !transgender@lemmy.blahaj.zone

C’mon, that’s what PR’s, RCs, and betas are for

It’s important to note that this is them moving in-development branches/features “behind closed doors”, not making Android closed source. Whenever a feature is ready they then merge it publicly. I know this community tends to be filled with purists, many of whom are well informed and reasoned, but I’m actually totally fine with this change. This kind of structure isn’t crazy uncommon, and I imagine it’s mainly an effort to stop tech journalists analysing random in-progress features for an article. Personally, I wouldn’t want to develop code with that kind of pressure.

Ada does an excellent job cultivating this space and supakaity somehow keeps the whole thing running. I don’t know if I could deal with half the shit they do

Transition at a younger age. Would have saved me a lot of hurt in the years between

It’s such a cesspool over there

It’s weird you think China is some kind of gotcha, because if the best the Canadian government could do in the unlikely future where “China is parked on [Australia’s] coastline” is a symbolic gesture that hurts its own citizens, I would rather you wouldn’t. So again, why do you expect us to damage our own economy for the sake of a symbolic gesture?

Trump does not understand or respect symbolic gestures in trade/deals, and you’re complaining that we won’t make one at our significant detriment. Considering you and Mexico are the biggest importers from the United States, well targeted retaliatory tariffs have a real chance of hurting the US and enacting change. We import 10 times fewer goods (20 times if you include Mexico) and have a 2:1 trade deficit, so we don’t have the power to significantly affect the US in the same way you do, and our treasury has made it pretty clear we’d probably be the only ones hurt by such a policy.

We have better, actually effective ways to enact change (i.e. threatening Pine Gap, AUKUS, etc). So why do you expect us to damage our own economy for the sake of a symbolic gesture?

It’s not our responsibility to damage our own economy for an empty symbolic gesture

We’re not retaliating with tariffs because nearly every mainstream economist has advised against it, including our own Treasury. Here’s the quote from Steven Kennedy, treasury head, at a Senate estimates hearing on 26 February:

For a medium-sized economy such as Australia, there is overwhelming evidence that the use of trade restrictions imposes costs on our consumers and businesses… If Australia were to impose tariffs, we would bear nearly all the cost, given our size and inability to affect the world prices of the goods we import.

We would be shooting ourselves in the foot for the sake of what would essentially amount to little more than a symbolic gesture. We have other, more effective cards beyond tariffs.

Again, it was a Washington Times article, not Post. The Washington Post was not linked because neither Trump nor Snopes cited them. Likewise, whether or not the “stuff on yahoo” that “seems like ai slop” to you doesn’t change whether it is AI authored (it isn’t, it was written by a human working at Snopes and posted to Snopes) nor whether it is accurate (it is). Trump did post the article with the image in question to his Truth Social account on March 9, 2025.

The discussion raised by people in this thread is not about the content of the linked Washington Times article, it is about the fact that the president of the United States is using iconography developed by the Nazis in the same manner as the Nazis. That said, to take the obvious bait you’ve set up, we’ve seen how ineffective both Russia and North Korea’s army are. They are clearly a poor model for a well run and organised army, regardless of their supposedly “masculine strength”. I also reject your claim that strength is a purely masculine trait. The US has had a (if begrudgingly) diverse military for as long as it has been a global superpower. Gay people, trans people, people of color, and more recently women have been contributing successfully to that strength for longer than you or I have been alive. Many of those groups are typically cast as non masculine, yet clearly display great strength.

I’m not going to be responding to you any further, I don’t really feel like you’re engaging in good faith.

It’s a Washington Times op, not the Washington Post. It is not an “ai slop yahoo article”, but Snopes article aggregated on Yahoo News.

Like you’re trying to attack the credibility of these criticisms while seemingly being completely unaware of who wrote them or who they’re responding to.

Context no longer seems to matter to them, so it shouldn’t to anyone else when discussing things like this. Pass it around.

Ignoring necessary context required to correctly understand or interpret even a direct quote while “pass[ing] it around” is extremely deceptive. Exhibit A. In context, it is extremely plausible that Trump was referring to the 2020 election as, by losing it and being eligible to run in 2024, he is now able to oversee the 2026 FIFA World Cup.