"TypeSpec is an attempt to combine the design-first and code-first worlds into something that works across both methodologies and reduces cognitive load for designers. ... The TypeSpec approach also means a general decrease in complexity, which, for Microsoft, eases its use across the organization." -- #ChrisWood
The most important context for understanding the "Open"AI melodrama is this:
The founders launched it as mostly open tech in a not-for-profit enterprise. That structure was intended -- they said at the time -- to do good for humanity.
They proceeded to pull a bait and switch that ranks as one of the most cynical money grabs in human history.
Now, at least, all of the BS about ethics and honor are in the open -- basically the only thing about this company that is open.
"If we receive a long list of components in an airplane, do we feel safe enough to fly in it? No. Like any complex systems, the resilience and security of
software systems depends on how components interact."
This quote from @shortridge resonates in my booooones about how SBOMs feel maybe useful, but not that much.
It's a long document, but worth a read on recommendations you might take to heart at your work, even if the USG doesn't.
"We believe SBOMs – and the fervor for it emanating from the federal government – is a palpable case of myopic thinking that should be forsaken if the federal government seeks to maintain credibility on software security."
Had to open twitter for the first time in a while to handle a DM (wish I could set up an auto-reply telling people to just email me instead) and one of the first things I see, other than the endless AI hype, is a thread where a bunch of web devs with decades of experience are all agreeing with each other that all HTTP verbs other than GET and POST are useless.
And I'm just🤦♂️
How did we get to this point? These are the people who are supposed to be senior developers in the industry.
Scanned over the ‘festo and … it’s … well… it’s … ok it’s … like this..
“We believe in nature, but we also believe in overcoming nature. We are not primitives, cowering in fear of the lightning bolt. We are the apex predator; the lightning works for us.”
"'Our analysis shows that 52 percent of ChatGPT answers are incorrect and 77 percent are verbose,' the team's paper concluded. 'Nonetheless, ChatGPT answers are still preferred 39.34 percent of the time due to their comprehensiveness and well-articulated language style.' Among the set of preferred ChatGPT answers, 77 percent were wrong." -- #ThomasClaburn
@rabble i don't know of any right now but there are some attempts to create coding AI (not so much conversational as computational). i can't point to one ATM but have seen a few show up in my inbox.
the good news is that higher-level interfaces (e.g. APIs and links/forms in HTML) are much more "converstational" than things like protobuf or graphQL and might yield some interesting solutions.
i don't yet see enough focus on this interface AI, tho.
when a majority of the people who have had "direct lived experience that has been demolished as a consequence of our poor environmental stewardship" decide they won't put up with the abuse anymore.
if past is prologue, tht will not be any time soon.