I'm actually looking at HFT companies. Hoping I find one that allows remote working - but looks like there are basically no remote roles going at the moment
I'll admit I'm quite anxious for Children of Strife. Children of Time is an all-time favorite, but each subsequent book in the series was a bit of a disappointment. Fingers crossed this one turns the tide
I kind of agree with you on that... and I kind of understand why.
The first book was an exploration of humanity in the stars. While there was contact, it had more the traditional science fiction footing that we're familiar with.
The second book was getting into the exploration of the mind and other minds. While the first book touched on the mind - with spiders being more relatable to how we think... the 2nd book presented us with something more alien in how the octopus thinks... and something even more alien.
The third book was downright confusing until the end and was more of a philosophy book about the mind. Can one mind be in two bodies? What entails thought? What is identity? ... and for that matter, what is reality?
The 2nd and 3rd books are good (and interesting) science fiction, but they go much deeper into exploring philosophy than many other science fiction books and use the scaffold of the universe to explore the mind rather than technological advancement. The upgrade of technology and how that changes things isn't the focus of the story - as one would expect in more traditional science fiction, but rather an exploration of a new mind. That change in the expectation from the first to the second (and third) book has some wish for more of that first book with the challenges of humans (as we can understand them).
Book 1 is a first contact story with survival. Book 2 is a psychological mystery about alien cognition (and a bit of horror to it too - "we're going on an adventure" gives me shivers). Book 3 is much more of a puzzle around unreliable narration and reality.
For me, I enjoyed the first book. I was confused by the 2nd book because of the change in the "it's not about the technology and survival anymore...". The 3rd book confused me on the first pass through it. The second time going through it and understanding where things were leading and being able to pick out the changes made more sense... even though I was expecting a book about the mind rather than science (the first pass through I thought it was more about the crow's minds).
For me, not so much a decrease in quality but more of an evolution as the landscape of sentient beings expands. The paired covids in the last book, were a great addition.
Don’t normally buy a hard cover or kindle (I like the paperback) but I may do that for book 4 “Children of Strife”
Agreed, the first one is a masterpiece and every sequel feels like a step down. It's a real pity because we do need more good SF writers, there are already too few of them.
I liked shroud a lot, but the ending felt very ungratifying. It's like Tchaikovsky wrote himself into a corner and didn't really know how to wrap it up nicely. I find this to be true of some of his other books as well.
A counter example to this is that I asked it about NovaMin® 5 minutes ago and it essentially told me to not bother and buy whatever toothpaste has >1450 ppm fluoride.
Such is the nature of probabilistic systems. Generally speaking, LLMs read the top N search results on the topic in question and uncritically summarize them in their answer. Emphasis on uncritically, therefore the quality of LLM answers is strongly correlated with the quality of top search results.
This is why I am so excited about the way GPT-5 uses its search tool.
GPT-4o and most other AI-assisted search systems in the past worked how you describe: they took the top 10 search results and answered uncritically based on those. If the results were junk the answer was too.
GPT-5 Thinking doesn't do that. Take a look at the thinking trace examples I linked to - in many of them it runs a few searches, evaluates the results, finds that they're not credible enough to generate an answer and so continues browsing and searching.
That's why many of the answers take 1-2 minutes to return!
I frequently see it dismiss information from social media and prefer to go to a source with a good reputation for fact-checking (like a credible newspaper) instead.
> finds that they're not credible enough to generate an answer
The credibility is one side of the story. In many cases, at least for my curious research, I happen to search for something very niche, so to find at least anything related, an LLM needs to find semantic equivalence between the topic in the query and what the found pages are discussing or explaining.
One recent example: in a flat-style web discussion, it may be interesting to somehow visually mark a reply if the comment is from a user who was already in the discussion (at least GP or GGP). I wanted to find some thoughts or talk about this. I had almost no luck with Perplexity, which probably brute-forced dozens of result pages for semantic equivalence comparison, and I also "was not feeling/getting lucky" with Google using keywords, the AROUND operator, and so on. I'm sure there are a couple of blogs and web-technology forums where this was really discussed, but I'm not sure the current indexing technology is semantically aware at scale.
It's interesting that sometimes Google is still better, for example, when a topic I’m researching has a couple of specific terms one should be aware of to discuss it seriously. Making them mandatory (with quotes) may produce a small result set to scan with my own eyes.
A year ago I asked it to do deep research on Biomin F + a comparison to NovaMin & fluoride. It gave a comprehensive answer detailing the benefits of BioMin & NovaMin over regular fluroide.
What's incredible about that is that you are acting like that was a success story but it is a nuanced topic and it swallowed all the nuance and convinced you.
You're now here telling us how it gave you the right answer, which seems to mostly be due to it confirming your bias.
I've just spent past week building a medium complex web app for editing configs at $work, so I can chime on this.
Having worked with earlier versions of sveltekit in the past, I have to say the new reactivity system is not that bad and pretty easy to wrap your head around. Once you're used to the runes (there's like 4 you have to remember) you can just focus on building stuff and it's really quite a pleasant and productive dev experience. I've gotten multiple compliments from people about the speed and quality I was able to deliver this with and that's in large part due to sveltekit.
I do have to give a shout out to good ol' bootstrap for allowing me to build something that looks good, works on mobile and is just easy.
While the factors you mention may (or may not) cause Germany to dip into a recession in the near future, calling it a "collapse of the economy" is of course gross hyperbole. Boom and bust cycles are an expected and well studied feature of developed economies.
Let's say you're initializing a huge array on boot that takes 100ms. Packaging everything into a single .js file won't change that. Taking a snapshot of the state after boot and using that for subsequent boots will allow you to skip that.
Sure you can, just click the "x" on the top right of the shorts row and they will be gone. Though, you might have to re-hide them every x days, but still if you don't want to watch them you really don't have to.
This is just AI generated blogspam. The real meat appears to be on [0], but it's behind a paywall which none of the archivers appear to have circumvented. Really unfortunate, because the content looked highly interesting!
My company has built quite a few complex capacitor + Angular + Ionic apps and the performance on iOS is fine. Some even got featured by Apple, so that should be some indication that quality and performance was alright.
The one I know of (IMC trading) does a lot of low level stuff like this and is currently hiring.
reply