HN user

markfsharp

120 karma
Posts2
Comments20
View on HN

The whole Anthropic/US administration/Fable guardrails/overpricing situation has been so frustrating for me and disruptive that I am really an inch away from just removing Claude Code/Codex (or any other US LLM) from my daily use.

I wonder how many others are feeling like I do at this whole situation?

Not very pro or anti BASIC but very pro your rationale, and love that you do what you do because it is fun and stimulating. I love reinventing wheels also, and, in fact, believe it is under appreciated just how useful it actually is. I'd encourage people to reinvent things for their own benefit, maybe you might end up building a better version of something, but more importantly you will possibly encourage, energise or inspire another to explore and learn.

Yes, I agree, and understand the point better. Totally a great thing if this can be made accessible to a wider audience and not expect them to do all the work to grok it, especially if there are easy/easier ways to bring it to a wider audience. The parentheses don't usually remain a problem after the initial bump, I had the same issue when I started clojure but after a short while it doesn't continue to be jarring. I think after about 90 minutes it just started to be "natural" perhaps that the wrong word, it was just something that was like ok after a bit and didn't notice too much.

I think the initial surface look makes scheme give a bit of an 'oh crap' response. But since minikanren is actually a small program and scheme doesn't really have syntax the language should be less of a problem than initial concerns might make one think. Grokking the actual logic in any language is going to be the bigger challenge. I guess I am trying to encourage just rolling with lisp if you can, but I totally get the initial reactions toward scheme though.

I don't know about other people's experience, but from mine, I see a lot (most) devs abstracting too early in the name of clean code. I guess engineers gonna engineer when simple boring repetition is sufficient and those premature abstraction are unnecessary.

Unfortunately, I don't feel confident humanity has the ability not to destroy the environment that sustains our life. We are simply too selfish, unable to adjust our thinking to new information sufficiently, lack compassion for others, and/or just don't care about things that don't affect us directly.

Pure functions, i.e. that are 1) idempotent 2) have all their arguments passed in 3) cause no side effects as a by product of evaluating the function are fundamental to functional programming.

There are planning to take on Amazon, for one, but not sure what they are doing internally so couldn't possibly comment on that front.