They are more likely trying to race towards wildly overinflated government contracts because they aren't going to profit how they're currently operating without some of that funny money.

If you bought a license from a physical store - depending on the language of that license - yes, it would entitle you.

I think calling it nostalgia is a bit too charitable. I see it more as a delusion.

It seems like a reasonable proxy, but I would assume that general reduction of smartphone usage improves mental health.

Why does this feel like an ad? I've seen pangram mentioned a few times now, always with that tagline. It feels like a marketing department skulking around comments.

The other pangram mention elsewhere in this comment section is also me -- I'm totally unaffiliated with them, just a fan of their tool

I specify the accuracy and false positive rate because otherwise skeptics in comment sections might otherwise think it's one of the plethora of other AI detection tools that don't really work

FWIW I work on AI and I also trust Pangram quite a lot (though exclusively on long-form text spanning at least 4 or more paragraphs). I'm pretty sure the book is heavily AI written.

> Why does this feel like an ad?

Because it’s written like a tagline instead of like a sentence people would say to each other.

If you don't create the ticket, it may never get done, too! That not doing the thing might lead to convincing others the thing needs to be done which directly leads to doing the thing.

It may not be doing the thing, but it enabled the thing to be able to be done at all. Cheers to the precursors, the planners and the annotators. Through you, more things are done.

So we're the spotter in that metaphor. I like it!

"spotter coding" or perhaps "checker coding"?

"verified vivisection development" when you're working with older code :D

Of which, perhaps, the author isn't aware? Perhaps the author has very narrow experience in programming languages.

Or it's hyperbolic.

>Perhaps the author has very narrow experience in programming languages.

I got that impression as well.

Xi's impressed about types being optional because they can be inferred.

That's ... hardly a novelty ...

>Only the first and third part are compulsory in Zig, which is kind of puzzling, coming from Java or C.

Funny they mention Java that has got type inference few years now. Even C got a weaker version of C++'s auto in C23.

One of the many things I don't like about C++ is that auto isn't type inference but instead C++ has type "deduction" which is a little different, in some cases a type will be "deduced" even though what you wrote was ambiguous and you may have wanted a different type.

Physical feels that way to me sometimes. In the US, I get assaulted on a constant basis by mailers and ads for things I never expressed any interest in. Waste of time, waste of paper, waste of resources.