Fluoride in water wouldn't be necessary is sugary drinks were taxed heavily (or just banned altogether) and dental care was affordable. But obviously that's considered communism if you're a typical american.
She's a scientist. Most of the people on here are writing software which is essentially reinventing the wheel over and over. Of course you have a different experience of LLMs.
please provide context when making statements, thats a better way to communicate your ideas. what, when, why, how, where - so a reader takes your map, and can relate to the territory.
I love Common Lisp, but I would definitely think twice before implementing anything I want other people to use on their machines in it. A tiny C executable is pretty nimble in comparison to anything you'll get out of Common Lisp.
I understand, it isn't that bad though: a web app of mine with dozens of dependencies and all templates and static assets is 35MB with SBCL and core compression (that includes the compiler and debugger, useful to connect to a running app and exploring its state (or even hot reloading code)). I suppose that's in the ballpark of a growing Go application. LispWorks has a tree shaker that builds a hello world in 5MB.
Eh, you can just distribute a .lisp file as though it were a ruby or perl script. CL is faster than the usual scripting languages, but admittedly not as fast as C or Rust.
All the smartest people are humble and realise the limits of their capability. as a result they automatically make decisions that reduce complexity. unfortunately software development is full of people who overestimate their capability with obvious results