Judging from reported figures, roughly 80-90% of households in the US [1] have a household net worth of at least $0. That means that most people do in fact have an estate.
Median household net worth is in fact somewhere in the $100k-200k range, which is definitely something that could be meaningfully called an "estate." (Most of this tends to be the house, the median net equity in which is about $190k as of 2022).
It’s just the legal term. If you have a relative die with a bit of stuff and an ancient car, they have an estate and someone needs to execute it even if the total value is less than most lawyers care about.
An "estate" is a legal term for property, assets, and liabilities a person leaves behind upon their death. A family member is a top practitioner in the field of estate planning and resolution, and some of the messiest estates they have handled are pro-bono cases of exactly the type of people you would put in italicized "most people": poor, not really able to upkeep a house they inherited from a relative which hadn't had title properly transferred on a previous death because they didn't have money for an attny, now can't get a loan to fix the roof...
Yeah, if you are homeless, carless, and have only the clothes on your back and a shopping cart of stuff, you don't have an estate. Everyone in the middle class in the US has an estate. Much of the time it passes automatically to their spouse on death, but it's still an estate.
And if you are concerned about where it goes, get a GOOD attny. There are many bad ones hanging out their shingle as "Trust & Estate" attnys, and some of the next messiest cases are fixing problems made by those not-so-good attnys.
Peaceful protests, with guns, are a historically great way to remind those in
power that the power comes with duty and obligation to protect the people.
According to what I've read, Alex stepped in between an altercation with a woman and an agent. He physically inserted himself into a situation with law enforcement; thats different from what I'm saying.
Can one really not imagine a case where the cheating machine being used by students is a bad thing for teachers? Does everything have to be "politically motivated"?
Sure but that runtime is much more general purpose - JS runtimes are focused on network apps. For example you can write an app like Calibre in Python and QT and it is much lighter than writing something with JS and Electron.
It’s not the async loop - it’s interfacing with the system. JS is designed to run in a sandbox and the only way out in say Node.js is to write C++ addons.
For example you don’t get to see TCP headers with Node out of the box and you can’t craft packets, whereas you can in Python.
Yeah, I've thought about this since I do prefer JS as a language... Always thought the main advantage of Python was interaction with C libs. Which is also why CPython was the only serious option for an interpreter, even though things like PyPy were faster.
You may be thinking of Litestar (previously named Starlite) that was based on Starlette akin to FastAPI but then went their own direction implementing a framework rather than relying on an upstream for their core product.
He was a software engineer at Netflix before turning to content creation. It is also clear watching his videos that he knows his thing. As an experienced programmer myself, I find his commentary to be way too relatable to be just bluff.
He may not be Don Knuth, Linus Torvalds, John Carmack or Fabrice Bellard. But he is definitely a serious programmer. That he livestreams doesn't make him less of a programmer.
If it doesn't matter, why did the previous poster mention them?
It's pretty clearly a type of argument called an "appeal to authority", where an authority is cited to add credibility to a position. It's usually considered a pretty weak form of argument, but it can be effective. So the credibility of the cited authority is relevant.
I'm using LLMs to assist my development and I'm measurably (in all the ways we
engineers could possibly care about) doing better work faster.
Studies suggest you aren't any faster and may in fact be slower. It's difficult to study such a new tech, but even optimistically, empirical evidence is only showing a ~3% gain in some domains.
Writing code is rarely the limiting factor in our work.
I think those studies have framing or methodological issue.
I agree the maintenance burden is probably being undervalued by developers in general, but there's just no way the work I do isn't faster. I just categorically couldn't have achieved the outputs I do now in the time windows I have. The software just wouldn't have existed in the world of 3 years ago and I did enough coding back then to say that with certainty.
In the past 18 months I've seen experienced developers turn out incredible work using llm-assisted tools, over and over again. With the right harnesses, processes and result-oriented testing, you can simply produce so much more high-quality work.
I know it's anecdotal, but I have so much data from my own experiences and those of my peers that I know these new tools are here to stay. It also makes me believe that those studies are either flawed or out of date.
Surely that reinforces the argument - there are now a million LOC in a different language, needing stunning amounts of work to validate it actually functions? Writing the code has never been the bottleneck.
There's no uncertainty here. Every day I ask myself how long something I did would have taken without it. The answer is always crystal clear. It's not hard or difficult at all.
studies suggest nothing. i've released a massive number of features in the last year for several projects that i estimate would have taken me multiple years to put together in a much more mentally exhausting way.
I am not estimating anything. This is my own evidence from my own projects. I have deployed gigantic features this past year, each of which would have taken me the whole year to write.
reply