malkarouri

Honestly interested in your experience.

I am not surprised around (1). HTMX is based on REST, which is by nature based towards having the state in the server and having a stateless client. But what is the advantage of having the state in the client. Isn't that just a bias of the current frameworks?

I can see cases where you really need a thick client, and in that case I would use GraphQL rather than REST for those. But, there are quite a few cases that can work with REST and mostly server side.

I think (2) is solved by out of band capabilities of HTMX. I don't think that is naturally a limitation of the conceptualisation.

The point is that explaining the requirements in a precise manner to LLM is literally coding the problem in a higher level language; the LLM is acting as a compiler for that precise description in English.

I actually am sympathetic to your point about the value of LLMs in programming, but more from the perspective that LLMs can help us to do the precise description gradually and interactively in a much better way that a dumb REPL.

Exactly. Should be GPL licensed, and commercial projects can always buy commercial licenses.

How would that work? If it is used by an open source project that is BSD-licensed, and then that one was used in a closed source project, what then?

GPL propagates. Presumably BSD doesn't.

Are you building scripts for the Debian distro? Given that they already include bash and actually support it for interactive use, what would be the issue for you scripting using bash? I am sure that the experience of moving to dash wasn't fun at all. But users in general are not affected that much as far as I understand.

https://en.hexlet.io/courses/intro_to_programming/lessons/ty...

So you are defining intelligence to be whatever the brain does? That is certainly a philosophical position.

That is more or less the same pitch of physics, while most of the important activity is taking place in the biosciences at the moment.

The underlying assumption is reductionism: if we understood atoms best, we can understand and control everything built on them. I am not sure that I can agree with you on that. Complexity makes that a pipe dream.

I read that as mother nature forces p-values and was, huh? You mean the journal, of course.

Solving things with list comprehensions is very idiomatic in Python.

Also, not nesting things is very idiomatic Python ("Flat is better than nested" is part of the Zen).

So, people generally don't think of nested list comprehensions as idiomatic.

And I am not sure how many of them support Arabic right to left either..

I think the tool would be much more useful with a whitelist. Do this only for grep, awk, sed and other similar tools.

Of course, much more thought is needed to try something like this. Somebody could as well use awk with its system command to do whatever..

For what it's worth, organizing other scientists work from a new perspective and having a unified framework is the highest form of genius a scientist can achieve. That is why for example Einstein is credited with relativity rather than Poincare.

Why wouldn't reality contain contradictions?

(Physics actually seems a hodgepodge of random philosophical assumptions no one bothered to ever review because they're deep in the model. Not unlike code suffering from code rot.)

This..

I suggest you try again. I think the situation has changed. I have been using Numpy/Scipy for a few years now, with all the negative experience of having to sort out whether to use g77 or gfortran and the right gcc flags etc. The most recent version, Numpy 1.7.0, is the first one that installed for me smoothly on Windows and OS X (official packages). YMMV, but I think it is alright now.

He already had an official apology from the prime minister in 2009. Many people want the conviction off the record, and it had to be done through a pardon because he cannot appeal or be tried again, and the law in effect at the time was not violated.

The petition to pardon is here http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/23526

I wonder if such things should be evaluated in terms of the knowledge and experience they gained the company. I would say the Surface RT experience has reflected a lot on their experience and strategy developing Windows 8 and Phone. If (say) the experience is reflected in the level of success of Windows Phone 8, then may be overall it is a net success for Microsoft.

I think every company (like Microsoft, Apple, Google did) need to maintain software and hardware divisions, if only to get the feeling what are the software current needs in an evolving hardware profile.

That is one of the coolest bugs I came across lately.

You are probably mixing up UAE and Dubai. The UAE consists of 7 emirates, including the capital Abu Dhabi and Dubai. The GDP of Dubai is dependent on services, trade and a bit of industry, and they have little oil. Abu Dhabi is oil-rich. A big chunk of its GDP, and the net GDP of the UAE in general, is oil.

One point that I had from experience is that Wikipedia tends to entrench the bias of its editors, through seemingly sensible policies. A specific example happened to me while contributing to the Arab spring pages (while the Arab spring was ongoing). It was claimed that the Tunisian revolution was the first by an Arab country. I disagreed because Sudan had a couple, which I know of because I am Sudanese. Sensibly, the admins requested citation needed and no original research. Given that the statement in question was mentioned in the NYT and the British Guardian. I had to contact the journals, and the Guardian actually published a correction, before the issue was settled. For other issues involving Sudan I was generally not so lucky. Wikipedia reflects the US understanding of Sudan, with a European slant, much more than it reflects the situation in Sudan.

My lesson: we must try to understand the New York Times effect on man..

"Religion is the belief in an absence of evidence." Quoi?

May be you have some particular religion in mind, but many beliefs coexist happily with science.

There is a domain where atheists and many religious people agree on. Which is the domain that is not covered by the particular religion and that is covered by the scientific method (do an experiment, analyse data, get conclusions, rinse, repeat). Choice of medicine is one such area. True, some religions believe in voodoo or other "alternative medicine" but that is not part of the definition of religion.

The critical question is what to do with things we have no physical evidence of, things which we have no data of, are uncertain of. Things that science has not reached a verdict on. Religions typically have loads of these. The existence of god/gods for example. Having such a belief does not contradict the available science at the time, so we can have a scientist who believes in gods carrying on his research cheerfully. Atheists don't believe in gods unless there is physical proof. That also does not contradict doing some scientific research. The issue comes when you mistake "SCIENCE", the tool we use daily, with "science", the set of propositions, heuristics, conjectures and half-baked theories that will always exist at the frontiers of research. That effectively means you choose to place your trust in the set of current researchers and if they get it wrong, you get it wrong.

In short, science is not and has never been the whole of objective reality. This assigns mythical powers to scientists, which some would certainly call a "religion".

Why should there be a point? Can't it be point-free?

(Sorry, somebody had to say it..)

Exactly. If I have that much capabilities I would buy the airline. It seems neater.

Saudis spend the most money on hardware, yes. But the hardware is left unused, and the sole reason for it is as a token in lieu of payments for US and allies.

The Saudi Arabian army does not project any power in the region, and is not a player. Saudi Arabia is not even able to support its allies in Lebanon against Iran-backed military players.

"Saudi Arabia has a military far exceeding most European states"

Speaking about knowledge of international politics, this statement is simplistic and arguably wrong. Saudi Arabia does have one of the largest military budgets in the world, but that does not translate to better or more military. It translates to buying more equipment and giving more money to the weapons industry in the US, the UK and other countries. The US is the main beneficiary, so it is kind of like protection money.

In particular, Saudi Arabia is far from the biggest military force in the Middle East in practice. Israel, Egypt, Iran, and Saddam-era Iraq are/were all far stronger. The last fact is the reason that Saudi Arabia and Kuwait invited the US and the coalition when Saddam invaded Kuwait, despite the loss of face. And it is the reason the US is military active in the Gulf region: Saudi Arabia is nowhere near Iran military speaking..

I actually don't think so, not that I have downvoted you. V8 was such a breakthrough at the time, it blew off the competition. Since then, many competitors have picked up the tricks and as shown in the bennchmark, uWSGI holds its own against Node/V8. As a result, the Node/V8 combination is not going to be so dominant in a few years in terms of performance. Another factors will come into play such as the language and the libraries available (the ecosystem). I would find it much harder to predict the dominance of the Noode/V8 ecosystem compared to that of Python or Java in a few years' time.

I did an RHCE exam in 2003, in their place in Surrey (Guildford IIRC). I am pretty sure that Red Hat is a long time user and has been using Python to mean the language in their software and documentation in the UK a long time ago. Can you contact Red Hat or users of their software of exams for the last twenty years to confirm that? I imagine they would be happy to help.

Not surprising, really. ML is the shiny new thing, so the MLers don't tend to feel they missed anything while the statisticians need to keep up with the times.

I say this as an MLer still struggling to find out what R^2 is, among other things ..

For me, that was an especially good starting statement, though with no cliffhanger as such.

It reflected the emailer's intention to not waste my time. Tells me who they are, and tells me it's not a sort of long-winded spam. Sure, I have skimmed it (glazed over?) and came back to it later after reading other parts of the email. But it gave me the option to bail out while promising interesting things if I am interested.