spritefs

Why Go and not Java?

This article just makes me more reluctant to ever use it for anything

But if Google wants to ruin their own lang, sure by all means

It's an IDE

Adding tracking to an actual language is unheard of, but can't say I'm surprised Google is trying

Is anyone else noticing that for several 5 year blocks (pentad) the world just seems to get markedly worse? It's like no body seems to give a shit about anyone except themselves anymore. Whats the cause of this? What's the solution?

I used to think that random people on the internet could be trusted, now my attitude is (essentially) "if I don't know you, then fuck off and fuck your opinion too"

I'm not saying this directed at you OP, I've felt the same thing you've felt about the world becoming worse off

In 2018-19 I'd think about making a blog connected to my IRL credentials. Now, this isn't really something I'd consider doing. I used to want to write an autobiography, now I'd rather not say anything

And with respect to this:

And at the same time, we get these cases where a dude like Tyre,

That whole thing makes me feel physically ill. If people are capable of that kind of cruelty, what does that say about our society?

Similarly, strength is really just about how much you work out.

Some people can get shredded really easily because of genetics. Some people are just naturally more fit than others

but I'm mighty suspicious of where you're hoping this conversation will go.

My point is your initial point is an oversimplification. If you throw the same resources at the same group of people from a similar socioeconomic status, there will still be a difference of ability. Some people will move faster than others

So the crux of my argument is this: just because there's an inequality of outcome does not imply that the cause is purely socioeconomic. Given constitutional differences, striving for equality of outcome is a sub-optimal use of resources

Should there be standards or some kind of baseline? Yes. But striving for absolute equality of outcome at the expense of everything else is a net negative for society

Quic sounds like it has a lot of performance potential but hasn't hit critical mass yet

that while of course various aspects of intelligence can be affected by genetics

Yep this is what I was looking for. Given this, the original claim isn't right

Can you demonstrate that genetic factors play a stronger part in how our society defines "intelligence" than the things I mentioned?

Claim above was that intelligence "is really just" access to education, but now the goalpost has shifted

Now it's that access to education is "the most significant part". Is it? How could we know either way? By churning out a bunch of studies? The claim still isn't falsifiable

Aligning society along a hierarchy of "intelligence" is really just aligning it on a hierarchy of access to education, which is just a function of economic class privilege (or racial class privilege really, these are tightly integrated even today in many societies for historical or otherwise reasons).

This is the claim: intelligence is just some combination of education, class, and race

Let's state the obvious here: genetics. Why did you conveniently leave that one out? Are you in denial about (inherently) stupid people existing or something? Can you prove that they don't exist?

Also, before you assume I'm being more specific: I'm not saying equal access to education is a wasted endeavor. Sure, make the public school system good in rich and poor areas

But we're talking about intelligence in general here, so leaving genetics out is just avoiding the obvious because it isn't politically satisfying

It's all worthless because I don't see any fancy branding in your resume.

According to who exactly? Some stupid person somewhere? Why should anyone here care?

No clue why this is getting downvoted, maybe by people working in said business who are coping over this

But really: why don't more people use ublock origin? It makes the web actually usable

If I go on a website and see a bunch of sponsored bullshit, it makes me much less likely to ever go there again

It is why "redditor" exists as an insulting term, but fb/twitter/etc don't have one. Not necessarily just the users, but the mods too.

It really is. If someone mentions using reddit irl I usually assume that they're bad news and steer clear

The investors and the engineers and all the workers at Reddit will become rich, but the people who do the most important work, as outlined by the brief, are the anonymous moderators that create the culture of every subreddit.

That's assuming the IPO goes well

So four were appointed by Nixon, who specifically had in mind moving the court to a more conservative stance.

Did he? Whether or not that was his intent is unclear

Bellman-Ford is optimal for positive edge only.

???

CLRS says it takes negative weight edges (just no negative cycles) and does it in O(VE). I have no idea where you're getting this from

Weird that some companies have a dedicated role for that. My current gig doesn't talk about agile at all... we still have two week sprints and self directing teams and all of that, just none of the annoying buzzwords

I see a lot of people talking about firewalling in this thread...

Apple owns the whole IP range 17.X.X.X, so you can just put the below line in /etc/pf.conf to block all talk with those IPs

block drop from any to 17.0.0.0/8

Also for an additional layer of protection, you can add these domains to the hosts file:

https://gitlab.com/intr0/AppleBlock/-/blob/master/AppleBlock...

Also I see a lot of people trying to defend apple in this thread. Imo life is too short to defend a corporation this large (unless you have a financial incentive to maintain trust in it, obviously)

Also: arguments like this (which tend to be extremely persuasive, and often account for a non-trivial amount of arguments) could be easily eliminated with a simple rule.

I wasn't really trying to make an argument, it's more of a heuristic if anything

How do you account for...

a) the unknown?

just do whatever habit says to do (and don't call it the truth)

b) the known delusional nature of the mind?

this is a fun one. give the delusional mind a pen, paper, and 20 years and maybe they'll write the next phenomenology of spirit and trigger world war III

Afaik all my tpm does is create outlook events and occasionally come to our standup to bitch about how we aren't doing enough jira

What did the agile people do?]

Actually, "woke" opinions do reflect those of the general population

If woke here means thinking that racism is bad, sure. If it means supporting gay marriage or first trimester abortion, sure. If it means not being heteronormative, thinking that gender identity should be taught in public schools, thinking that affirmative action is good... you're starting to drift into fringe territory. Not saying I don't agree with fringe, but claiming these beliefs are majority doesn't agree with experience. For the record, most people I know are democrat voters

If woke here means thinking that social justice and "systematic overhaul" (whatever that happens to mean) are a good idea, then from my own personal experience that's just corporate noise to people. The only place where I really saw a lot of this was in college where most of it was from administrators and a loud but small group of the student body

There's a reason why Obama avoided a lot of these topics while campaigning

They are also often distinguished by their social and cultural roles, such as their expected behavior and appearance.

What if a woman doesn't engage in this role? Is she still a woman? It seems like we've come full circle instead of heading in one direction

Ik this is just an AI's response, but this same tension exists elsewhere

This is scientifically and necessarily (due to the architecture) true.

Given we assume Kantian the framework you just outlined

you do not actually possess omniscient knowledge of reality

The usual response to this is that if you can't possess omniscient knowledge of reality, how could you possibly make a statement about reality

Imo the way out of this: talk about things being true in the context of logic only, the second causality comes into the picture the word "true" means something entirely different. Trying to reconcile the two is like trying to write a mathematical proof of the existence of God

What I don't understand is this assumption that if you force your beliefs on someone else, it'll make them more likely to believe the same things and they won't see what's being done

This just signals a lack of confidence to me. If people are truly confident that their beliefs are the most rational, logical, good for society, etc, then why is any of the proselytizing necessary?

Like I see people putting flags in their front yards and bumper stickers on their cars, different sides on different parts of the country. What doesn't make sense to me is this: why do people think this lack of subtlety actually wins others over?

You know what does show confidence? People who are so confident in their own belief system that they question it openly to resolve its contradictions. People who acknowledge that their own beliefs aren't universal

This is something that could very easily be done with a meta search engine or alternative frontend like whoogle (assuming it isn't already implemented, could be)

why the hell would anyone trade a bunch of factual sources, documentation, and actual expert opinion for an LLM that's consistently and confidently wrong for a significant portion of queries?

I can see this thing being useful as a summarizer. Even then I don't trust it to be correct and have to fact check every single thing that comes out of it against results I find in a search engine

You know what's even better than an LLM? Actual experts (bullshitters excluded). Having books written by people leading in their respective fields, professors, managers, people above you who have experience and know what the hell they're talking about. Why? Because they understand what you need to know in that context

I'm probably being too hard on chatgpt, I'm sure it will find a commercial use that's beneficial to society. I just hope search engine providers don't hop on this fad and raise a generation of people educated on word salad masquerading as authoritative information

Social media engagement is now one of the leading causes cited in divorces.

Where'd you find this?

Cancelling as many advanced classes as possible

I wish someone would compile a list of every school district that's doing this or planning on doing it, just for public knowledge purposes

which is computed at compile time. However, MACH_VM_MAX_ADDRESS differs on iOS and macOS, since iOS has a smaller address space and uses more bits in the pointer for PAC signatures.

I wonder if there's a point of even having these differences in the first place as the specs of MacOS and iOS computers converge. It's weird how little MacOS has changed since like 2012, I'm surprised apple hasn't ruined it yet

It is literally impossible, for example, to get a smartphone from another vendor anywhere near as powerful as the latest iPhone

What's the point of having all of that extra power if the pre apple silicon iphones could already run their workload fine? It isn't like it will make the device last any longer because of the planned obsolescence with the battery

What's the point of having the most powerful mobile cpu if the average mobile workload won't come close to ever using it?

edit: Maybe it's because apple is trying to diversify the average mobile workload to cover more use cases. This way people who struggle with a full desktop OS won't have to leave the safe and happy garden

Imo taking notes just takes your attention away from the lecturer and it's best to only write down major details, if anything is written down at all

Also since most lectures have some kind of recorded equivalent now, there is no scarcity with respect to the info the lecturer is communicating. So you can always go back and rewatch. Taking notes just gives you an excuse to not remember what you're hearing

Just curious, but how would your employer find out who you're working for when you go somewhere else?