I always found this argument funny because how would you use pronouns for someone whose gender you do not know? They. It’s they. E.g. you are given the sentence: Jordan went to the store to buy apples. And you want to ask a followup question regarding how many, you reply: How many apples did they buy?

And that’s not how English was taught to me or 99℅ of the population (including English as a second or third language) 20+ years ago. Singular they was only used for situations where the gender (read as superficially visible sex) was factually unknown. You see a forgotten umbrella and never saw who forgot it: “Somebody forgot their umbrella.” As soon as you only got a glimpse on the person forgetting it you would make a guess about he/she.

They has been used for gender ambiguity in everyone’s lives since grammar school.

If you’re younger than ~30 and from Great Britain, maybe. GB were the first to formalize and teach it like that less than 2 decades ago (if I recall correctly).

People just have an inherent bias towards trans folks and it’s incredibly depressing and sad.

That’s bullshit projection.

I, a non-native speaker, complain about increased ambiguity of the language because of singular they as a personal pronoun and make a proposal about new pronouns for the purpose.

You: Ah, must be transphobe. Let’s ignore everything he said (which doesn’t relate to transphobia at all).

It’s so frustrating not to be able to have a discussion about stuff making a language harder than it needs to be without people invoking transphobia, like, instantly.

But hey, I called it: can’t have a discussion about it and I’ve given up on it.

edit: tiny add-on. I was still taught gender-neutral he and only heard about they later while being discouraged to use it in writing.

Doesn’t feel like you want to have an honest argument when you ask how far we should go back on a proposal about going forward and don’t address the single motivator ambiguity.

I criticized singular they/them for increasing language ambiguity and suggested replacing it with something new like xe/xer multiple times. The reply is usually a shitstorm and downvote tornado. I’ve given up on that front.

It doesn’t make it flawless (at all), but installing the microsoft fonts helps. Most distros have a package or helper tool for that.

You mean like this?

Invest in debugging and code review capabilities: With 45% of developers reporting increased debugging time for AI code, organizations need stronger code review processes. They need debugging tools specifically designed for AI-generated solutions.

Or, maybe, don’t use tools that generate garbage code.

I’ve been using linux as a daily driver for more than twenty years. At the same time I had to use Windows for work. Windows has always created more headaches and wasted more of my time than linux. The people who fail on linux are those who expect/demand it to work like windows and those who are not willing to invest the same amount of time they used to learn their way around windows on linux.

“Windows just works” has always been a lie. It’s a fragile heap of crap that constantly breaks or misbehaves. People spend a metric shitton of time with workarounds for failing updates, registry hacks … or externalize that cost to others. Windows “just works” if your kids, company IT, or someone else keeps it working.

If you invest the time to learn a distributions/linux ways, and make a reasonable pick for distribution, linux is much more stable and low maintenance than windows.

neat

At this point I assume ignorance and incompetence of everybody talking about benefits of “AI” for software development.

deleted by creator

I’ll quote myself from some time ago:

The entire article is based on the flawed premise, that “AI” would improve the performance of developers. From my daily observation the only people increasing their throughput with “AI” are inexperienced and/or bad developers. So, create terrible code faster with “AI”. Suggestions by copilot are >95% garbage (even for trivial stuff) just slowing me down in writing proper code (obviously I disabled it precisely for that reason). And I spend more time on PRs to filter out the “AI” garbage inserted by juniors and idiots. “AI” is killing the productivity of the best developers even if they don’t use it themselves, decreases code quality leading to more bugs (more time wasted) and reducing maintainability (more time wasted). At this point I assume ignorance and incompetence of everybody talking about benefits of “AI” for software development. Oh, you have 15 years of experience in the field and “AI” has improved your workflow? You sucked at what you’ve been doing for 15 years and “AI” increases the damage you are doing which later has to be fixed by people who are more competent.

Hot damn (I’m so [so] “guilty” of this); seriously – it’s no even (or odd) funny!

fixed title

If we can’t build an equitable, sustainable society on our own, it’s pointless to hope that a machine that can’t think straight will do it for us.

To be fair, intelligence isn’t found in anything marketed as “AI”. This one being a scam using humans, actually featured intelligence.

Removed by mod

Na, the tools suck. I’m not using a rubber hammer to get woodscrews into concrete and I’m not using “AI” for something that requires a brain. I’ve looked at “AI” suggestions for coding and it was >95% garbage. If “AI” makes someone a better coder it tells more about that someone than “AI”.

As an experienced software dev I’m convinced my software quality has improved by using AI.

Then your software quality was extreme shit before. It’s still shit, but an improvement. So, yay “AI”, I guess?

No.

That’s ok, we don’t kink shame around here.