Misspellings are misspellings. They happen, nothing to get worked up about as long as you can decode what was said. But whatever, if it annoys you, it annoys you.

It’s been a couple of days now, and I’m replying through the response reply so I’m lacking rereading the context. But my memory here, was someone was explaining it as a potential joke in a typical social fashion, where you’d expect people to have a bit of chuckle but know that’s not really the case.

Instead a bunch of people are getting so literal and piling on them for not being correct, I suspect they already knew they were unlikely to be correct.

It’s the kind of response that sucks the fun out the internet. It just teaches people, no-one will appreciate a bit of playing around and everything becomes a little more sterile.

That the misspelling is amusing because if you look at it in a certain way it would still apply to AI/LLM companies. Whether it was intended or not.

Do we always have to be so tight and literal about everything?

Right, is it faster including the time it’s taken you to verify that the tests are testing what they should be testing and isn’t just testing the implementation as written?

They ruled that for copyright to apply, a human must have authored the work.

Now if an AI spits out code that’s a duplicate of a humans authored work. Then you could argue the author is actually the original human. And this it would be covered by their original copyright

People who find success can, sometimes, become arrogant and become blind to other factors contributing to their success. Just enough failure can keep you humble. Pretty typical human reactions.

Does it, if you can work on the normal application code, there’s no reason you can’t work on the lower levels of applications. It’s all just code. Ramp up might take a bit more time, but I wouldn’t expect horrendously so. As long as your patterns make sense and what is there is written well enough and is not a spaghetti monster in the making, any one should be able to pick it up.

Time to go back to email lists. Anyone can come along sure. But it’s only going to be the most determined.

I would have thought that you fix it locally, git commit, and regenerate the patch set again. Maybe with optional squashing of commits so each patch set doesn’t keep growing.