An elitist attitude towards plagiarists is common.

Also elitist attitudes towards people for whom English isn’t a native language, elitist attitudes towards people with dyslexia and other conditions that make writing difficult, and elitist attitudes towards people with lower education levels.

The BBC used to encourage its announcers to use Received Pronunciation, which was associated with high social class.

The solution to this form of elitism was not to make everyone speak RP, but to encourage non-RP accents, which is more common in the modern BBC.

Your comment seems elitist by encouraging the use of artifice to fit better into an elitist world, rather than breaking down elitism.

I disagree, because those aren't their words.

Do we care about words or thoughts? Many folks are more interested in semantic meaning than character sequences. To each their own of course.

One problem I see with the broader use of LLMs these days is the death of literacy.

For example, you chose to read my response and attack the vocabulary as if that was the point I was trying to make. This is a misunderstanding. I am purposefully reusing the word choice of the comment I'm replying to.

I was trying to very concisely point out that if an LLM is generating your writing it is not your words or your thoughts that you're trying to communicate.

It doesn't pass the file contents at all, it passes the file path.

Yep, this is a common misunderstanding, and the blog post itself repeats it.

The only way to "pass the file contents" would be through the standard input stream, but the script might want to use stdin like normal, so this isn't an option.

I think "oh this looks like it could be made generic" is the wrong time to convert to generics.

You should convert when you reach the point "I wish I had that code but with this other type". Even then, sometimes interfaces are the right answer, rather than generics.

I mostly agree, hence the

> end up copy pasting code instead

bit of my original comment

Only if the salt is kept secret. There also needs to be a different salt value per ip, obviously. But given those conditions, it works.

Of course, it would be just as simple to use the salt as-is, in that case, since you have to look it up anyway.

IMO, while their use cases do overlap, LXC is more geared towards a user installing things while Docker is more geared towards a developer creating a ready to use package.

LXC creates environments, while Docker creates apps, is another way to say it.

In languages with closures it would be easy to set a variable to the lambda while that same variable is also captured by the lambda. In fact, this seems to happen once in a while in Go, since closures are always lambdas.

I believe you're thinking of the AppleDouble files with name ._file. Those haven't really been used for the past 10 years or so (unless you run software older than that, obviously).

Indeed, direnv and asdf integrates, such that PATH is set to the values exposed by your .tool-config. This avoids the asdf shim and makes executing the tools slightly faster. Good when you have to run them over and over in a script.

Before I learnt what it really means I always imagined it as a blowtorch heating things up, which sort of fits the original but obviously has a much wider scope. So maybe GP has the same idea I had.

It was using IPv6 in IP, just like 6to4, protocol 41.

I haven't heard it called a political issue before though. It just had problems, like being blocked in firewalls and security problems where the encapsulated packet wasn't checked properly, etc.

I'm not a native speaker, so I apologize.

> The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is now deprecated because the current IPv6 transition mechanisms no longer use these addresses.

«We forbid you to go right because we are going left.» It doesn't look like a technical issue. How I should call it?

Right. Neither am I, so take this with a grain of salt. But I'd use "committee decision" in this case.