I'd like to see touch-typing at >60 wpm a standard attribute of adulthood again.

They're doing their part in keeping a spotlight on Polymarket. The content of the article is not irrelevant, but it is less important than the existence of the article.

*Correction: more often

McDonald's revenue in 1992 was almost $5,000,000,000.[0]

0. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/24/business/mcdonald-s-net-u...

And yet even the $20,000 she initially asked for to cover health expenses was apparently too much according to McD execs.

4. It is ἐνέργεια, direct spark, of the God. It can be described but not comprehended, imitated but not replicated.

to be fair, at one time "life" was also seen this way. "There's a magic sauce, an elan vital, that makes living organisms live".

But in the end, it turned out to be biochemistry.

I think, given our history, it makes sense to be skeptical of claims that suggest that the things we don't yet understand cannot be comprehended or replicated.

Now do Epic.

Is there a process server at your place yet?

Or we can "keep acting" like there's no duly-constituted amendment process.

The number of devs I've worked with who can't touch-type and don't use or know their way around a proper IDE is depressingly large.

This isn't about touch typing or IDE tricks. I'm an IDE power user and - reasoning aside - I used to run circles around my peers when it comes to raw code editing efficiency. This is increasingly an obsolete workflow. LLMs can execute codebase-wide refactors in seconds. You can use them as a (foot-)shotgun, or as a surgical tool.

So many are masters of AI marketing, it's thinkable one of them has mastered AI.

Same with debuggers. I run into people with 10 years of experience who are still trying to printf debug complex problems that would be easy with 5 minutes in a debugger.

I think we're seeing something similar with AI: There are devs who spend a couple days trying to get AI to magically write all of their code for them and then swear it off forever, thinking they're the only people who see the reality of AI and everyone else is wrong.

At the same time - there are devs that spend two days setting up a debugger for a simple problem that would be easy with five minutes and printf. AI is a tool and it's a useful tool - it's not always the best tool for the job and the real skill is in knowing when you use it and when not to.

It's a sort of context of life that the easy problems are solved - those where an extreme answer is always correct are things we no longer even consider problems... most of the options that remain have their advantages and disadvantages so the true answer is somewhere in the middle.

Right, but then the AI doesn't have a positive ROI. In all fairness, it never has a positive ROI but now its much more negative, to the point the accountants will put an end to the experiment after year end reveals how negative it really is.

A lot depends one what you do for Part C (if you do).

This is only superficially true. Here's a fair discussion that could serve as a counterpoint: https://medium.com/@ignatovich.dm/applying-solid-principles-...