Middle manager types are probably interested in their salary performance more than anything. "Real" management (more of their assets come from their ownership of the company than a salary) will override them if it's truthfully the best performing operating model for the company.
I'd open up Claude and start learning what data types are, and practical examples.
Once you know the constraints of what you are dealing with as a developer, you can then deal with the how.
There is a liberation from the unknown and empowerment once you realize the fundamental set of abstractions involved are the same across software that powers a website to that moves a spacecraft.
Most may begin to learn development by diving into learning a programming language. That route tends to throw people headfirst into learning grammar, syntax without contextualizing it to practice. This is like a developing human learning to speak before they've learned object detection!
It is not censorship for those who like JS-looking languages like TypeScript. The idea that focusing on JS is alienation is at least hilarious for someone that doesn't follow the typescript religion.
alienation is to want that people should always choose TypeScript, which is what you were initially complaining in favor of, just because this specific post mention not using Typescript.
No. That's your interpretation of what my post meant. I was not complaining about anything. Neither did I indicate anywhere that everyone should always choose Typescript.
Typescript is obviously so related to Javascript that I wanted to understand more—technical reasons—why the author was excluding Typescript in such a way from any sort of treatment, even passing remarks that explains his stance. I may not have explicitly asked for a technical discussion, but this is Hacker News and I know better what my intentions and meanings are than you do.
You're the one who brought the complaints, and made it into a religious dispute.
Go into my comment history and find any discussions from me about Typescript or Javascript. You're superimposing a debate on me that I'm not part of. I did not know that debate was so omnipresent in the community that you deem it rational to extract such intent from my question, but I see that now.
Perhaps I was not privy to such a debate because Typescript has so obviously won.
That's a great question, but its hard to get enough insight into how Groq is serving models to properly know what's missing.
If I had to hazard a guess, it would be that their system architecture (# of chips and chip architecture itself) might not be designed for a high concurrency situation.
Author seems to not engage with a core problem: humans rely on muscle memory and familiar patterns. Dynamic interfaces that change every session would force constant relearning. That's death by a thousand micro-learning curves, no matter how "optimal" each generated UI might be.
The solution is user interfaces that are stable, but infinitely customizable by the user for their personal needs and preferences, rather than being fixed until a developer updates it.
If they're complicated guis, sure. A handful of options is probably fine. And I don't think we'd take away the ability to just type or shout at the AI if it doesn't provide the option you're looking for. "Give me a slider for font size", "give me more shades of red", "ok, let's focus on the logo. Give me some options for that"
