Rails was fully into growing pains and maintainability crises (some large rails codebases took years to migrate) and PHP was in transition; some good things by then but it was not what it is now.
You really do have to be well under thirty years of age to think 2035 is far enough away for any of this stuff to be plausible.
Ask anyone over fifty how far away 2035 is and they will tell you something like it's not long after Christmas.
I am fully willing to stipulate that Naomi believes it earnestly (rather than being like Musk just kicking things down the road) but those are very, very optimistic scenarios.
(Not meant as a nit-pick — it's just something that adds really fascinating historical colour to a useful expression, that people often mistakenly re-correct)
It's spelled "lede" so as not to be confused with "lead," as in the metal with which was used to print newspapers.
Since "lead" (as in beginning of a story) and "lead" (as in metal) were frequently used in print newsrooms, the spelling of one changed over time to reduce confusion.
There were a number of other language convolutions in newsrooms, such as "slug" which meant a piece of hot metal, and so was useful for describing a spent bullet, the very short text that served as a title for a particular story, and a section of metal letters on the printing press.
/Worked for two major newspaper companies back when printing newspapers was akin to printing money.
“TK” meaning “to come” is another one. “More TK” in particular is now a blogger affectation but it seems to have been a way to communicate to an editor that a story was so far incomplete, within the text of a submission, without the editor assuming the words “to come” were part of the story. And elsewhere it indicates a placeholder that needs a fact to be confirmed and filled in before publication.
it seems to have been a way to communicate to an editor that a story was so far incomplete
When the story was complete, the notification varied from newspaper to newspaper, but very often they followed the AP's convention of writing "-30-" which I have always believed was something the AP print wire actually (and surprisingly) adopted from the broadcast side, because broadcast stories were ideally 30 seconds long.
Not sure why you got downvoted on this one. You're right and you even turned it into a bit of language history. It's bury the lede, and now I know why.
I think it was fair. I added the bit in brackets to clarify because maybe it had come across as a nit-pick.
In my head there are corrections that are rude that I don't do, because I genuinely think authentic writing matters more and more, and because I am absolutely not above reproach where grammar and spelling is concerned.
Then there are things I think people would want to know, that are either in the intellectual-you-have-a-little-bit-of-pinach-in-your-teeth territory or in the "cool fact" territory, or somewhere hazy in between.
I figured if one is going to correctly use an expressive phrase like "bury the lede" that they've perhaps only ever heard someone say, they would absolutely want to know about the spelling quirk, because it fully makes it better.
Other people obviously read it differently and the downvote was a useful signal.
Nobody pro-EU left in the UK believes we will be able to rejoin with the rebate, veto or retaining our currency. I don't know who is telling you that we think this: you should probably not listen to them because they are relitigating old conflicts for their own purposes. This is IMO a false framing.
There's no campaign asking for that; we understood it would be gone before we even left, and it was a key part of the Remain position that we were squandering a unique position within Europe.
We will, I think, never rejoin the EU as it is currently constituted; it is better off without us. If it can retain its current unity — which is by no means a given — then we will be on the outside of it forever.
You have your own issues and I do not believe that euroskepticism in continental Europe is gone, though I do think the Hungary transition shows that the Trump administration's deliberate, right wing bigot meddling is having less of an effect that they would like. Not that it is the only reason you have a surging xenophobic far right.
We in the UK have to fend that off a different way; Trump and that evil shit JD Vance present a different threat and we have other levers we must pull, and if we were in the EU at the moment the USA would only be using our tensions with the EU against everyone; without it they have much less power to stoke nationalist fires.
So for the next few years at least I think the campaign to rejoin should be on pause.
I don't really understand where you two disagree. You appear to be saying the same thing.
Sure, nobody is campaigning to rejoin with the old priviliges and opt-outs, but that's because nobody sees how to rejoin with the old priviliges and opt-outs, nor do they see a path to convincing UK voters to rejoin with a worse deal than they used to have.
Hence, all the british politicians who think Brexit was a mistake are just sitting on their hands, and not making any effort to even start a rejoin campaign.
You appear to tacitly accept this premise when you say
> "If it can retain its current unity — which is by no means a given — then we will be on the outside of it forever."
We are saying the same thing except for that specific narrow point (I edited my post a little to make it clearer).
I was just observing that if that is a consensus on the continent — that we're going to be begging to be let back in on the old terms — it is people spinning a yarn for their own reasons. Because it isn't a correct characterisation.
Even the Leave voters have had long enough to realise that what Remain campaigners were saying about the structural advantages of membership and the speed of recovering any comparative position are true. Brexit-means-Brexit types all seem to project success into the future long enough that the only people who will call them on it will be nursing home carers.
You are right that there is no pathway to rejoin that isn't a humiliation. And the longer we wait, the more people forget what we had. Hence Reform and Restore can rage about a worsened border situation that their own politicians actually created; their voters have forgotten that Brexit made it worse.
It happened because we left border treaties that meant that continental EU states were obliged to prevent onward travel to us.
Once we stepped out of that, we needed to find new incentives for France and Belgium to care. We have failed to do so and we had destroyed many agreement frameworks within which any such deal could be struck.
Indeed. Even in that speech he contextualises it as a long-term goal.
Plus, what he thinks and what is possible are different things, and he absolutely knows it.
We will, I believe, not rejoin the EU while it is in its current form, because leaving closed us off to the bespoke deal we had before; that deal mattered and was the thing that made our relationship with the EU functional.
We will now suffer as a result of the hubris of idiots for generations; it's unavoidable, and it compounds almost every problem we have.
There is, however, reason not to talk a lot about rejoining for the next two years, because two of our biggest economic threats are Hormuz and Trump; the former can only be addressed as part of a global coalition now, and the latter can only be addressed by playing directly to his narcissism with royal visits and very bespoke strategy. Trump plays the EU by trying to divide it anyway.
The real target of small models is surely the opposite: knowing with clarity how to conversationally or otherwise reason about your requirements in natural language, sound and imagery, consult APIs that interact with apps, and then have a strong, generic capability to reason about what it finds.
If you want it to know more things locally, you could hopefully distribute wikipedia or other appropriate large sources on a flash storage, properly pre-indexed, with a local tool API, and let it work its magic on that. Not least because that is as I understand it, considerably easier to incrementally update.
This is, without doubt, a very difficult target, not least because it is rather at odds with the way LLMs work on a crude level.
reply