HN user
Hm, interesting. With how slow the testimonial carousel on the web page is though, I don't have much confidence that Carbon is performant either. How many pieces of that (frankly massive) techstack require dedicated network trips?
I use it basically as the beginning of a pipe, where I want to process, for example, a String, but I have to start the pipe with an IO String.
Simplest example, I have would be to read something from a file and apply some function `f :: String -> String` to the contents of the file, and return an IO String again. Let's say that overarching function is called readFileAndProcess, then it could be defined like
`readFileAndProcess :: (String-> String) -> String -> IO String`
`readFileAndProcess f fileName = putStrLn . f <=< (readFile fileName)`
The "neat" thing about a config like that is to use incredibly basic programming things, like simply having variables, lists/arrays, arithmetic, string manipulation, etc..
As a basic example, I could have a list of basic packages that I want on all of my machines, and then depending on which machine my config is being deployed to, I might extend or shrink that list using actual code, because that list is represented as a an array or a linked list and I can directly manipulate that (though, at least in Nix I think everything's immutable, so you would technically only use that initial list to create a new list from it).
This is one of the big things I love about Haskell. Its way of making effects explicit and easy to spot in the function signature always struck me as insanely useful for exactly those reasons (though, obviously, it goes a step further where every function always has to return something, even if it is an effect or an effected state). In retrospect, I wish Rust had adopted something like this since it took a lot of inspiration from Haskell anyways, but I am very glad that there are people like you out there that are trying to remind people of this insanely useful concept of making effects more explicit!
Wish you all the best with Bagel!
It's a bit more friendly than that (according to TJ DeVries from the Neovim team). It's more like both teams bouncing ideas off of one another and inspiring each other. And that can result in one release or another just looking like implementing features from the other project.
So, I haven't read the paper, and maybe they go into this there, but I wonder whether this approach runs into the same problem any potential graphene-based technology seems to run into, which is synthesising graphene sheets at a scale to make this actually market-viable seems nigh impossible. Maybe there's some other breakthrough I'm not aware off, but my general perception so far is that most applications for graphene always run into this problem where it works incredibly well on paper and in small-scale experiments, but we cannot scale things up because growing graphene at larger scales is a giant hurdle.
If anyone here has more up-to-date info to share, I would be very grateful, obviously.
If that can be overcome, this tech here sounds AWESOME though. Props to these fine individuals working on this project.
A direct hit with the sun? Maybe slightly higher temperatures if the "impact site" was facing us, but not for long because the sun is highly convective and each "longitudinal ring" on the sun rotates differentially, thus dissipating the effects of that impact very very quickly. A good chunk of it would also probably burn up before even reaching the Sun, but how much of it is hard to say.
But keep in mind, it says "within 11 AU of the Sun", which is still beyond Saturn; Saturn's 9.5 AU away from the Sun, and Uranus is about 19 AU away from the Sun. So it's still pretty far away.
> Income taxes for corporations all disappear when the corporation reaches a given size
Could you explain why this is the case?
Just to comment on this real quick, this has multiple reasons. Basically, the larger your company is, the more funds you have to spend on lawyers and experts, as well as offshoring. Also, depending on the country you're in and the specific tax laws, it might be easier to fulfill incentives for nullifying the corporate tax (IIRC reinvesting and creating jobs is how Amazon nullifies a good chunk of their taxes, right?). That is not to say, we should completely axe corporate tax imo, because some of those incentives are really good. You want corporations in your country to reinvest and create jobs, because that's overall a really good thing for the job market.
The thing about Bezos' wealth is that a huge chunk (maybe even the majority) of it is already in the form of assets. That's not as easily moved overseas (though to my limited understanding it isn't impossible) without hurting his own company, and at that point it might be profitable to just pay a wealth or asset tax or something like that. Obviously that would need to be designed REALLY well, but there's a good chance that that's how we can tax exactly what we want to tax, without hurting small businesses and without hurting the lower class.
There was this one time where in some city in the US, cannot remember which, there was a city wide power outage, and some people were freaking out because they've never seen a non-polluted sky before.