DaiHafVaho

As an (anonymous) programming language designer, a few bits of feedback.

First, nice concept, but without open code, it might as well not exist, and without open specification, it might as well be yours alone, like one of Tolkien's languages. Closed languages wither and die, and yours seems well onto that path.

Second, what makes V compelling to you appears to be completely uninteresting to me in terms of language design. It might as well compile from V to Go; I can't see why not!

Whenever a language designer appeals to simplicity, they are usually appealing to whatever makes it possible for them to be productive, and they are usually missing that the productivity is personal because the designer is the one who builds the language. The GL demo seems to be a great example of this sort of situation.

I hope that you publish your work so that we may properly critique it.

Edit: Here is another language designer who is not me saying "closed languages die" (https://blog.golang.org/open-source). I think that, until we actually have a compiler for V (or whatever it is hopefully renamed to before release) in our hands, we ought to be extremely careful about trusting that any of this exists. It is all too common in PLT/PLD for somebody to come in with bold claims, outrageous mockups, and zero toolchain. I addressed what I saw, which is yet another compiles-to-Go hobby language. To become more than that requires a committed community and a common repository of open code, and the author appears to have only the former.

To ghost somebody is to make them like a ghost to you.

The easy: Drink more water. Stretch regularly.

The habits to change: Eat breakfast. Cherish loved ones.

The difficult: Empathize with your employer; understand how they (don't) value you. Contemplate the evanescence of your work; it will all someday fade away, and you must come to terms with this fact.

This "book" does not work without JS enabled.

Disappointingly, out of all of the changes in HTTP/3, cookies are still present. It'd be nice if HTTP/4 weren't also a continuation of Google entrenching its tracking practices into the Web's structure and protocols.

PyPy offers such a long-term support; they will support their Python 2.7 interpreter indefinitely. [0]

I hope that 2019 is the year of PyPy adoption, as folks get ready to leave CPython.

[0] https://morepypy.blogspot.com/2016/08/pypy-gets-funding-from...

Monotonic versioning [0] seems to be a strictly better scheme; "semantic" versioning doesn't actually include meaning, just the opinions of the authors of code. A language's development environment could enforce the monotonic requirement.

[0] http://blog.appliedcompscilab.com/monotonic_versioning_manif...

I bet that you're into free content too, when you're not on your high horse. The public domain is a great thing and we should feel entitled to it.

Don't forget that a paywall only enriches the owners of the site; it does nothing to ensure that journalists are compensated. If you want to fund artists, do it directly; paying an artist's owner and hoping that the owner is a good person is a losing strategy.

Of course. A proof is that which convinces; I was convinced, but that doesn't mean that you have to be convinced. I was presented with evidence which I can't share with anybody: my experiences.

I'm not sure.

It's possible that I came to my conclusions purely through philosophical reasoning, and that I am suffering the sort of defect that famously consumed Cantor or Gödel or Pirsig. It's easy to say, "I'm not crazy! You're the one who's crazy!" Or perhaps there is a repressed childhood of abuse somewhere in the memories, but who can tell whether repressed memories are a real thing, or whether memories are trustworthy in general.

At the same time, though, people delude themselves all the time. It's a cultural thing; I think that memetics is the right field of study for figuring out how that works. And once one starts to realize how delusional their cultural beliefs are, one cannot help but start examining themselves. Upon learning about p-zombies, for example, I realized that I must be a p-zombie, because I had no evidence to the alternative and no way to refute the argument.

Fresh account for obvious reasons.

I wonder whether I "suffer" from this. It's not really suffering. I am very comfortable being a meatbag who hallucinates that they are thinking thoughts; I know that none of it is really real in the way that physical artifacts are real.

Now I have a new and better explanation for why I have visual hallucinations sometimes, particularly halos and fuzz.

For anybody else: Don't worry. You aren't controlled by any one thing. You're a colony of trillions of cells, all working together to produce a mutually-beneficial outcome.

Edit: Do I have free will? I don't think that the question makes sense. I have free will in the same way that my subatomic particles have free will [0]. I have the ability to choose and to choose not to choose, but none of that entails free will [1]. I can even say that I have free will, but that does not mean that I have free will [2]. I think that, even if free will is a thing, maybe I am not a thing which can have free will because maybe I am not a thing at all.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will_theorem

[1] https://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec18.html

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie