3JPLW

This is a great story.

Next up: I'd love to see the sub/super proposal get some more attention and effort.

https://github.com/stevengj/subsuper-proposal

More cores _actually_ running simultaneously means more likely chance of encountering sporadic race conditions. Also makes it easier to measure (and thus work to improve) high thread-count scaling.

I mean, they wouldn't have really wanted it to be formatted like a list, even if the numbering was correct.

Cripes, you're clearly smart enough to understand that the author meant "to [literally] store [all the digits/bits of] a number that repeats forever [in the given base] would require an infinite amount of memory."

Talk about splitting hairs.

(with airline points)

The site seems to be having some trouble keeping up; here's an archive/cache/mirror: https://archive.is/efTT9

Because it's not a notebook chip? 105W is... a little toasty.

Hunh? There was an active campaign to distribute and install lead-certified filters.

Looks like they're still available for free pickup: https://www.michigan.gov/flintwater/0,6092,7-345-73954-36627...

He didn't claim the water was not contaminated. He claimed that the _filtered_ water with a _correct_ filter _properly installed_ was safe to drink.

Was that not the case?

Those releases are 12 years apart and are definitely not using SemVer.

I’m not at all against breaking changes, nor am I trying to litigate which languages are harder to extend non-breakingly, I’m just surprised that there’s no compatibility guarantees between 3.x releases.

My point is really an aside, but none of your examples actually require eval. Any code could have used `async = 1` directly as a variable, for example. And dynamic languages needn't support eval, though they typically do.

It's just a challenge with permissive languages that expose as much of their internals as Python, but a practical view could still be taken — for example, it could be possible to run all the test-suites of packages in the PyPI on a new version to test for breakages.

I don't think that has anything to do with `eval`. It's just hard to do with a dynamic language.

And that's not to say it shouldn't be attempted!

Ok, sorry, replace "not possible" with "very difficult and not recommended."

I don't see how that changes what I wrote in a very meaningful way.

Naive question: does Python follow SemVer?

It's not the creation that's the problem. It's the dissemination of others' content and ads (and the choices in what gets promoted/highly ranked/etc).

It was a fiasco because it wasn't possible (until much later) to support both Python 2 and Python 3 in the same code base. This made for a gridlock between dependencies and users.

The 3.x releases _are nothing like_ the 3.0 release. You have a valid complaint about the 3.0 release, which was 11 years ago. If you've not tried updating from 3.x to 3.y — which is a very different process — then you have no stake in this change.

Then this is an unfair critique of this new release process. If you had issues with breaking changes between minor 3.x versions, then I'd fully understand.

I was curious how this changed from their previous process. It looks like they've historically averaged about once per 18 months for the past few releases.

    3.4.0 — March 2014
    3.5.0 — Sept. 2015
    3.6.0 — Dec.  2016
    3.7.0 — June  2018
    3.8.0 — Oct.  2019

I'm not familiar with their release process — were those "scheduled" releases, too, but just at 18 months (plus a little slop for release QA)? Or were they just ready when they were ready?

My mother bought a spinning rust iMac two years ago, sold to her as a "fast" machine. It was not fast. It took 15-30 seconds+ to do the most basic of tasks. It was unusable. I did what I could to remove background tasks and it was still painful to work on. She hated it.

I cloned the drive onto an external SSD with no other changes. Immediately she had a usable machine, and she now enjoys using it again.

Why do you think your analogy is at all comparable?

Did you read the article? She wore the skirt as she defended her thesis. FTA:

> She defended her Ph.D. dissertation in the handcrafted regalia, not in spite, but to show that rejection is a natural part of the process in achieving goals.

> -In the past people found it "morally upsetting" that no matter how smart you are or no matter how hard you work, that doesn't matter to the DNA you pass down to your kids.

That may not be true entirely true — in addition to passing on your DNA, you also pass on epigenetic "on" and "off" switches that determine gene expression. Most notably, this has been found to have three-generation effects following famine — an experience that "shouldn't" affect DNA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgenerational_epigenetic_i...

Anecdotally, I think answering and immediately muting calls from unknown numbers is a deterrent to repeated calls. They're almost always robocalls that wait for someone to start talking before launching into their shpeal. Without any audio input, they sit and wait exactly 10 seconds before giving up... and my hunch is that they put that number into a "dead" pool and won't try again.

Well, yeah, if it's not standard operating procedure I'd hope they'd refuse.

Now, it should be supported, but I don't want the folks on the front lines guessing (or figuring out on their own) what sorts of mathematical games are safe. Erring on the side of caution is the right approach for CSRs.

If you've not seen this NYT Magazine feature, you'll probably enjoy it thoroughly:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/26/magazine/sper...

Good for her! Unfortunately, your anecdote is not representative. Many older teachers are getting forced out because, well, they're expensive and new teachers are underpaid.

https://www.teacherportal.com/teacher-salaries-by-state/

This is missing a big portion of the picture: GPUs and other heterogeneously attached accelerators.

See the post on content blockers from a few days ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21025252

One challenge with AVX-512 is that it can actually _slow down_ your code. It's so power hungry that if you're using it on more than one core it almost immediately incurs significant throttling. Now, if everything you're doing is 512 bits at a time, you're still winning. But if you're interleaving scalar and vector arithmetic, the drop in clock speeds could slow down the scalar code quite substantially.

https://blog.cloudflare.com/on-the-dangers-of-intels-frequen...