Noe2097

Can't wait for GPT to prove that P=NP (or not)!

Wow that doesn't sound great.

We won't own games anymore, we won't be able to sell/acquire used games, we won't be able to play disconnected.

I'm curious whether Nintendo will be following the same path.

Each kart is turbo-boosted by 64 superconducting engines,” explains project leader Mario Idraulico

I guess we can now call you Mario 'Kart' Idraulico.

Oh wait.

Thank you CERN, that was a smart one.

It's a trick; he will come back unscathed in the next episode.

"what if objects were actually designed for a bad user experience, instead of a good one? she recalled in a 2018 TED talk. That was my ‘eureka’ moment."

Or, she stumbled upon some article or the very Wikipedia page about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chind%C5%8Dgu

Another take on the matter is: interruptions are inevitable, so reducing the "recovery penalty" is key, and can be learned.

That's something that you learn to do when you have a kid: suddenly, your periods of 4 hours of focus free time (for coding, exploring tech, whatever) during the weekend just _disappear_. You only get max 30 minutes of free time in a day; this is extremely frustrating initially; there is no boss to complain to, no meetings to blame, no solution but to deal with it. Progressively, you learn to switch tasks much more efficiently, by making regular check points, so that you can get interrupted any time and get back to deep work _quickly_.

Another hypothesis: https://xkcd.com/725/.

Talking about monetization strategy, there is a world where we would not have to remember "Zillow" or "Spotify", and instead ask for real state or music related actions, and have OpenAI "decide" for us what is "the best" options... As in "the option that paid the most to get promoted".

There has been a move in the past 8 years away from Java on the back end, notably to Go, by several large engineering organizations, which made the move, "motivated" by the example of companies like Google or by projects like Kubernetes, and seduced by the promises of a language simple to learn, build, and deploy.

Yes indeed, you are absolutely right. Sorry about that.

Sincere apologies, I mixed ibuprofen and paracetamol.

Ibuprofen is forbidden for pregnant women in the last 4 months in France at least - and by "forbidden", I mean "strongly advised against in a case of self medication".

Isn't paracetamol forbidden in the US for pregnant women already? It is in other countries

There is another _shocking_ realization in this work: there are 11 types of people: those who know what binary means, those who don't, and those who say they do but actually don't.

"The era of 1-bit LLMs"

Representing { -1, 0, 1 } can't be done with 1-bit, I'm sorry -- and sad, please let's all get back to something vaguely sound and rigorous.

It feels like civil international airports is the best place where dedicated embedded systems could be required for authorizing if not guiding airplanes to driveways.

Every way I look at it, Go brings tremendous regression when it comes to "modularity & composability" in the general sense of the terms.

Package management, package definition, interface definition, exporting, protecting or hiding components, feel like they were an afterthought, and as if specified by people who had absolutely no prior experience in other languages or actively ignored it.

There is no nesting of packages in Go. There is no selective visibility protection among packages except on the very first level. Exporting is such an afterthought that it is declared by the change of the first letter to uppercase. Local development of cross-modules was only introduced recently (workspaces) and is extremely primitive (no transitive replacement -- so workspaces depending upon other workspaces is not a thing, workspace-vendoring in the next release but will essentially conflict with mod-vendoring). This probably works with skilled and disciplined teams with strict linters and other tooling, and operating in a large mono-repository or on ultra small codebase. For others, it ends up in a large plate of spaghetti code with no help to untangle, and every single newcomer shedding blood, sweat and tears to wrap their head around a codebase which inexorably became monolithic by the invitation of the very language.

All learnings obtained from decades of building very large-scale applications in C++, of managing and publishing packages in Java or C#, was essentially put aside and ignored.

The sad but good news is that it's all being progressively rediscovered, but relearning from decades of nuget and maven for example, will take time, effort, exemplary humility and open mindedness.

Yeah they integrated a chipset zipping/unzipping content when accessing RAM.

As in the 90's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_drive

How is that different from a minimal lisp?

By having IO functions taking an argument representing the global IO environment/state and returning it. That way IO functions can remain pure.

The point is not about ignoring them; the point is about using a construction with higher semantics.

A loop is a label+goto in disguise. You have to look at what's inside to understand what the loop is doing; you can't get a global sense of how it is impacting data without looking at what it actually does.

In functional programming, loops are replaced by constructs such as foreach, reduce, map or filter, to indicate right away how the body of the loop operate on the data it is scanning. It enables a functional approach to looping, where one first thinks about how data are transformed -- about the functions to apply on items and what is the overall output of the loop.

Interestingly, lately, I find myself totally unable to do "nothing" -- to be unproductive by the description given in the article.

The perspective of spending 1 or 2 hours playing videogames or watching entertainment (movies, series) became terribly boring to me. I can only think of that as a loss of time: I wouldn't be a better person at the end of it.

Being able to better smash buttons, faster, at the right timing -- watching a story unfold on screen -- these used to be a great source of joy "before". But today, it seems all so dull; my intellect or my body doesn't get any better by doing that. Instead, reading whatever book on ML or even on an obscure programming language or technique, or spending time at the gym, or listening to a lecture on math or physics, sound so much more appealing to me.

I cannot spend time anymore just sitting, it literally upsets me. Anybody feeling the same?

Why oh why is that a backslash!?

Over the 9 languages mentioned: 5 languages (inc. JVM ones like groovy and kotlin) are using `$`, 1 language (swift) is using `\`.

`\` is a pain to type on many keyboard layouts -- actually most but the US one. It seemed to me that `$` would have been a much more "conventional" choice.

This really makes me sad. It looks like the choice was made on purpose to be different.

Try "Extreme Ownership".

It will give you concrete examples on how to broaden your scope out of just your individual contribution, by learning to care for all the rest, and pushing you to realize that to a large extent, the things you see as broken you can actually fix.

Even when they are not inside the codebase you are in charge of. Even if they aren't even on engineering side.

tech was a bastion of "treat your employees right, and they will be productive"

Is/was it? The shortage of qualified engineers have made some employers extra careful/generous, to attract and keep them. Or some others to divert brains away from their own occupations which could have ended up competing with them.

I'm not saying it wouldn't trigger legal action or resentment. My point is that the question is on the performance or lack thereof and how it was shared and worked on with the contributor.

I'm saying that someone who hasn't been doing their job for 6 months, has been told so repeatedly, has been shown and guided through an improvement plan, but still fail to meet the expectations, should not be kept at their position. Whatever the date for whatever bonus, yes.

It doesn't matter if it happens one day, one week, or one month or 6 months prior to that date. What matters is whether everyone was aware of what was happening and the implications of it.

If that is not the case, then yes sure, start now to build that file. In this instance, the date will pass, and in a couple of months from now the contributor will be out. The next instance, act faster.

It's unclear to me: Why are you wondering _now_?

Vesting is compensation unlocked after a period of time. It is _meant_ to keep people _engaged_. You shouldn't feel bad for having to terminate someone two weeks before vesting, or 1 month before vesting, or 6 months before. No more than you should feel bad for having to stop paying someone that you fired.

Do you have _facts_, undebatable ones, demonstrating that the person is below expectations? Do other team members share the same point of view? Do you have feedback from others, pointing out that this person wasn't pulling its part? Did you share that with the person? Did you share these elements, did the person acknowledged that there was missed expectations? Did you agree on concrete goals to progress and meet expectations? Did you guide that person on this, for like 2~3 months?

If you answered YES to all these questions, but the person is still failing, then let that person go. You've made your job. Whether they are vesting tomorrow or in 6 months or in a year, is _a detail_. They have been failing to meet the bar, you've told them, you explained them how to reach it, you guided them for some time, and they are still failing.

If you didn't, then start right away.

Put vesting in parenthesis. That is not the topic at hand. The topic is meeting expectations or not.

LSH is a _technique_, whose performance vastly/mostly depends on the hashing function and on how this function enables neighborhood exploration.

It might not be trendy, but it doesn't mean it can't work as good or better than HNSW. It all depends on the hashing function you come up with.

I must be missing something; hasn't this been happening for years? Viewing an ad in exchange for a continue?

How is that different from ad videos that must be seen to access otherwise "free" resources, such as free WiFi in Airports? Or even from video ads that auto play on YouTube? None of them captured my genuine interest ; but I accepted the deal of my brain time (or my closed eyes) in exchange for some retribution.

Couldn't agree more.

Recently I tried another take on the same idea: using default methods in Interfaces. It has nice properties, as it enables ~mixins in a way not dissimilar to what Scala provides, and enables overriding (e.g. for tests). Give it a try, it's ... refreshing :)

Why going for CSS as a syntactical starting point, if it is to change it so fundamentally that no IDE or existing tools will be able to handle it, and if it is to move away from its "theoretical" purpose of describing style independently from content?

Going that way, there are so many (existing) possibilities. Want something that looks like CSS but that has more structure? Use YAML. Preferring braces over spaces to delimit blocks, but don't fancy quotes everywhere? Use Groovy -- you will even be able to write a DSL to generate SVG in an afternoon, with the entire power of the JVM. Don't want anything executable? Forbid it. Refrain from picking a syntax that are not fitting your needs and for a language whose intent is different, you will just call for confusion

Was about to write this exactly. Keep the lifecycle management in a dedicated component. Unsafe seems vastly overkill for dealing with this use case.

I'm even having a hard time seeing how this could be slower than any other alternative. Yes, in the places where creating / deleting is necessary, the "root" structure will have to be passed around, but in the worst case that has the cost of adding one argument to a function (which has the nice side effect of making the lifecycle _visible_).