BillyClark

One important skill for school is to look at the entire question so that you can understand what the teacher is asking for, even if they don’t format the question exactly right.

In this case, your answer would not fit into the 6 spaces provided for the answer.

So you have to ask yourself what they meant by “Write the following words”. Since “the” is the same word repeated twice, once you’ve written “the” after 5, then I could argue that “the” has already been written.

Therefore, if there are only six blanks for the answer, looking at the entire question, I argue that the answer I provided is most likely correct.

1. alphabet
2. come
3. in
4. order
5. the
6. they

I suspect that most Linux users are former Windows users.

Did Alanis Morissette write this?

This does happen a lot, but have you ever had the opposite happen? Where you go into some of your older code, and not only is it nice to read, but you had anticipated that you’d have to make this change later, and so the design makes the change easy?

That’s happened to me a few times and all I can say is that it takes days for my self-satisfaction to wane.

a large chunk of the replies were “well MY displays work just fine!”

I just went to check the previous thread, and I think there’s miscommunication both ways here.

They read your post as “I’m trying Linux, but it’s even hard to get monitors to work.” So, they responded, “I haven’t had a problem with monitors on Linux in decades.”

There’s not much else they can say, as you weren’t really asking for advice, so you didn’t give any technical details, but you were still complaining about something that they like.

Meanwhile, you read them as you said, “well MY displays work just fine!” So their replies seem utterly baffling, defensive, and unhelpful from your perspective.

It’s a bit of a change of mindset to begin thinking that you can’t trust a PR even a little.

It has never occurred to me that other people trust PRs, even a little. I mean, that they might think about it in those terms.

This explains a lot to me.

Why does it take me longer to review code than other people? They trust the person who wrote it, but I don’t.

Why is it that when my coworkers think a person is untrustworthy, that they always end up begging me to do all of that person’s reviews. It’s because I’m not bothered by that. I already treat everybody as untrustworthy.

I’ve never understood how other people think when they do reviews, I guess.

Forgetting AI for a moment, I am always shocked when I am reviewing a coworker’s code and it’s obvious that they themselves didn’t review it.

Like, they sent me a PR that has a whole shitload of other crap in it. Why should I look at it when you haven’t looked at it? If you don’t review your own review requests, you’re a failure of a programmer human.

And I would be a failure if I approved such a request.

Getting back to the post, where is all of the review? The coworker should have reviewed the AI shit, whether it was code or documentation. The person who approved the PR should have reviewed it, as well.

Every business with more than one programmer should have at least two levels of safeguards against this exact thing happening. More if you include different types of test suites.

This post describes a fundamentally broken business, regardless of the AI angle, and so it’s good if everything is broken. With such a lack of discipline and principles, I say let the business fail.