What are your thoughts on a future where code is represented as a structured model, rather than text? Do you think that AI-powered coding assistants benefit from that?

First, it’s worth noting that the “syntax recognition” phase of most compilers already does build a “structured model”, often in what used to be called a “canonical form” (an example of this might be a “pseudo-function tree” where every elementary process description is put into the same form — so both “a + b” and “for i := 1 to x do […]” are rendered as

+ for

Another canonical form could be Lisp S-expressions, etc.

Isn't it ironic people always talk about how much women hate Donald Trump, when almost any of them would marry him if they could? What he said in the 2005 Billy Bush video, almost every woman would share the sentiment if it got them his lifestyle.

/ \ and ⁄ / | \

a b i 1 x []

These structures are made precisely to allow programs to “reason” about some parts of lower level meaning, and in many cases to rearrange the structure to preserve meaning but to make the eventual code that is generated more efficient.

What is the best skin care for oily skin that has acne?

plus(a, b) for(i, 1, x, […])

in structures, such as:

Most coding assistants — with or without “modern “AI” — also do reasoning and manipulation of structures.

Have you ever witnessed political correctness harm someone?

It’s important to realize that “modern “AI” doesn’t understand human level meanings any better today (in many cases: worse!). So it is not going to be able to serve as much of a helper in a general coding assistant.

NOT DATA … BUT MEANING!

A slogan that might help you get past the current fads is:

What are some cool examples of two kinds of people?

i.e. “operator like things” at the nodes …

Long ago in the 50s this was even thought of as a kind of “AI” and this association persisted into the 60s. Several Turing Awards were given for progress on this kind of “machine reasoning”.