junek

Are you really comparing LLMs to vaccines? Jesus

Let me guess: you hold some crank views that aren't shared by the people who maintain Wikipedia, and you find that upsetting? That's not a conspiracy, it's just people not agreeing with you.

Please step away from the lathe

Because one kind of thing helps people and the other kind of thing inflicts pointless cruelty on the innocent.

And the regime loves pointless cruelty.

Garfield Minus Garfield has the same bleak sense of desolation as Goya's "The Dog". Just wonderful.

I doubt they think much, in general

OK, fun. What can we do to mitigate this until it gets patched?

I'm generally in favour of the joycons as a concept. They make multiplayer party games a breeze.

But the execution in the Switch 1 is flawed. They're on the small side, and generally fiddly. If the joycons for the Switch 2 are larger and just more ergonomic then I think it'll be a win.

EDIT: the joycons also being little motion wands was also quite good. You don't need a separate accessory like on the other consoles. Overall the joycon is a neat little package of functionality, if imperfect.

you'll quickly learn you can't use it to block political ideology from the DM

That's like, not true at all. The X card is exactly for that purpose, the GM doesn't get a special exception from the effect of the X card.

As a GM, if a player reaches for the X card for any reason I'm obliged to stop and listen.

I'm curious what exactly you mean by "political ideology" in this context. Can you give a concrete example of the kind of thing that makes you uncomfortable?

I know it's a typo but this:

what more could a shell?

Is quite good. It could almost be the tag line for fish shell.

It is very practical to actually have a grammar

I fully agree that you need to have a grammar for your language.

and thus the possibility to use any language that has a perser generator.

See, this is where it falls down in my experience. You can't just feed "the grammar" straight into each generator, and you need to account for the quirks of each generator anyway. So the practical, idk, "reusability"... is much lower than it seems like it should be.

If you could actually just write your grammar once and feed it to any parser generator and have it actually work then that would be cool. I just don't think it works out that way in practice.

My hot take is that the allure of parser-generators is mostly academic. If you're designing a language it's good practice to write out a formal grammar for it, and then it feels like it should be possible to just feed that grammar to a program and have it spit out a fully functional parser.

In practice, parser generators are always at least a little disappointing, but that nagging feeling that it _should_ work remains.

Edit: also the other sense of academic, if you have to teach students how to do parsing, and need to teach formal grammar, then getting two birds with one stone is very appealing.

Sometimes I feel bad when I generate a UUID without using it for anything. Like I've wasted it.

The fundamental mistake is in trying to take input for one purpose and transform it for another purpose. Just have the user fill in an additional field for their name as it appears on bank statements, or whatever the second purpose is. Trying to be clever about this stuff never works out.

Don't be an asshole

They're absolutely transfixed by the "wow cool robot" effect.

What's wrong with being homosexual?

This is magical thinking

Seems like a bit of a leap from the renaming of birds to collapse?

Can you explain the causal chain there?

I would be _very_, very cautious with this. The problem is precisely that the system presents itself in a way that implies more than it actually has going on. Users will naturally assume there is a real parent-child relationship in the underlying data model.

A soon as someone asks for <thing that requires the parent-child relationship that is implied to already be there>, then you have to admit that it's a smoke-and-mirrors trick and you can't actually achieve that with the data you have.

Avoid storing visual figments in your database, they'll come back to haunt you.

Why does it matter to you?

You know perfectly well why.

Could we not do this kind of shit here please? Using trans people as the punchline of a joke is offensive and sends the message that we're not welcome here.

In the same way I'm OK with knives so long as one isn't being held to my throat.

Y'all are having really boring sex, it seems.

Is this kind of bigoted nonsense really welcome on HN? Are we that kind of people?

Nah, trans people have been around a lot longer than this.

It's more like left-handedness (or good old homosexuality), in that the rate of incidence is not increasing but rather that social repression has backed off slightly and people feel a bit more confident being out.

People can be a bit more open about their gender when they're less afraid of being killed for it.

The example is not simply a compliment, it's an _objectifying_ comment. That's the issue.

Try giving a compliment that addresses the person as a human being with real experiences, thoughts, and accomplishments, rather than regarding the person as an object matching some abstract ideal. It's not a matter of ideology, just acting like a decent human being.

Yes, that comment _is_ creepy and objectifying (regarding a woman as an ideal object rather than as a person).

If men want to be less lonely then they need to work on treating women as fellow human beings and not acting so entitled.

It's not a matter of not wanting to be spoken to in general, but specifically not wanting creepy, objectifying comments.