MyOutfitIsVague

Sandboxed lua can't assume it has access things like debug libraries or any of the file IO, among other things. Many setups pretty aggressively remove and/or patch libraries and even large parts of the default global table. Assuming a vanilla lua library environment can make a project like this unusable in many places.

Their point is that if 1000 programs use the same 1000 libraries, static linking duplicates all those libraries across each binary, taking that much more storage and memory (which can hurt performance as well), effectively making 1000000 libraries in use.

Dynamic linking gives you M binaries + N libraries. Static linking is M * N.

Are there any other elements that change their styling based on position in the document? I've been doing web development for over a decade and I've never even known about this behavior. Seems like a bad default, and I'm not bothered seeing it go away.

Then do so. If you want specific styles, then style your content. If you don't, then you get whatever the defaults are. I really don't think there's much worth complaining about here.

RST/Sphinx solves that problem in that there is a single canonical dialect, and it's already effectively used in many very large projects, including the Linux kernel and (obviously) the Python programming language.

> if I cut up some oranges and squeeze the juice into a cup I can't give it to my kid because fruit = sugar = bad?

Yeah, that's fine, but a 16 ounce glass of orange juice has way more than one orange in it, and it's got a hell of a lot of sugar.

The executive branch is really not supposed to have complete unrestrained control over the entire federal government.

The point about AI isn't about efficiency, it's about accountability. This administration already has a huge accountability problem, and the AI is another layer of "Oh, that wasn't really me who did that thing I did." This isn't just cynicism, the current admin is incapable of taking responsibility for anything they've done wrong (and perfectly willing to take full responsibility for things other people have done right).

> I don't want politics discussed at work, it's annoying and a distraction

This would be a ridiculous expectation if you were working for the federal government. Politics affect your work to an extreme level there. Not discussing politics at all is not discussing your job.

> I don't want people badmouthing their job or work or company. All of these behaviors are toxic and I would guess 80% of people are like me.

If your company was involved in something really bad, you'd rather just not know? If you worked for Theranos, Nikola, or Enron, you'd rather be able to continue on with your nose down than know what's going on?

I want to know the truth about my company. I don't want to be complicit in crimes or things that I consider unconscionable, and I don't consider willing ignorance a good excuse for partaking in unethical or illegal activity.

From what we've seen so far in this admin, none of that matters much anymore.

It's really a beautiful little show. Quaint, funny, and warm-hearted without being cloying or saccharine. Manages some mild drama and even melodrama without feeling forced or annoying.

I still haven't watched the movie yet.

This sounds amazing. I use Lua a lot, and luarocks has been nearly useless for anything I need it to do because it's so heavily opinionated. For anything more than "install a library specifically for direct execution on the local system" or anything around that, it's a non starter. Have an embedded scripting environment that works with Lua packages and you want to package scripts with dependencies for use there? Give up.

I don't know if this is better for that use case, but even if not, luarocks is clunky and annoying to use at best.

What's the tax value of "my city looks like a garish parade of bullshit I don't need"?

It's more an argument for classical economics. Getting the most benefit for the least cost is the most fundamental economic motivation.

Who is MSM?

You could help by providing something worth reading.

> This if course doesn't not mean there are zero deab people still receiving checks. With any system this size some fraud will exist, the question is how much, and how much does it cost to chase down.

Right, it's an optimization problem. You fight the fraud to the point that it optimizes loss. If it costs $1 million to stop $10 million of fraud, you do it. If it costs $1 billion to stop $10 million of fraud, you let that fraud happen.

There are very many pithy sayings to this effect, most famously "All models are wrong, but some are useful" (perhaps by George Box, but I can't find this exact phrase attributed to him)

Even Von Neumann said "truth is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations."

Why comment if you aren't interested in having an actual discussion or addressing anything that's being said?

Do you have statistics on hand? We know people order healthy food, and people order nutritionally void crap and alcohol. Without data, it's all meaningless conjecture.

In my experience, I started my career 15 years ago cleaning up codebases developed by cheap outsourced developers. They were an absolute mess. Today, I work with many very talented developers overseas. People who develop code at my level of quality and above (and I am a stickler for high quality, maintainable code).

The thing is how you research, what you expect to get out of it, and what you're willing to pay. There was absolutely a gold rush on bottom-dollar development by cheap overseas developers by management who had no idea how software really worked, and thought they could build a business on cheap offshore development. These were software farms staffed by unappreciated undertrained people from diploma mills. I saw truly shocking things. I saw code written entirely with gotos instead of loops, because the developer had never learned how to write a while loop. The companies spent way more in the long run trying to iterate, ask for changes, and ultimately having to hire higher quality talent for much more money.

I agree with the GP. The LLMs will get better, maybe people will learn that you need an LLM with a skilled developer, or maybe the agents will get good enough to fully drive themselves properly, or maybe just good enough that a non-technical pilot can get good work out of them. Right now, "vibe coding" is largely non-technical people making messy, unmaintainable, insecure code. Some of these are programmers and non-programmers just playing around, but some people are trying to build money-making businesses off this, and it does feel like a very similar situation.

And some circles hand wave away all criticism of any new thing as luddism.

This article is a bit more balanced, though, and clearly isn't criticising use of AI in programming, but specifically the "Jesus take the wheel" style of vibe coding. It's the same old "if you write code as cleverly as you possibly can, you are not smart enough to debug it", but to the next level, where people are writing code that they aren't even smart enough to read.

I want to make a small note, in that `$_` is a special Bashism (though it is supported widely), but Parameter Expansion is POSIX-standard and will work on all POSIX-compliant shells, not just Bash.

https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009604499/utilities/xc...

Game Boy, or any classic game?

Wario Land 3 is a really really good Game Boy Color game.

I see. Thank you for the detailed response. It sounds to me that GPUs could be a better option if there was significantly more stability and standardization across the board, but we're really just not in that place.

There's plenty of capitalism in Chinese business. It's not a purely communist country, it's a hybrid system with an active market economy.

That's quite surprising to me, as a regular hobbyist Blender user who sees at least 4x speedups on GPU vs CPU. Is it because of VRAM limitations on huge scenes? I assumed that big render farms used rigs with many GPUs with some proprietary technology to share memory between them to be able to fit the massive scenes.

Or are you actually responding directly to what I was saying, and it turns out that on big scenes, even apart from the memory use, CPU rendering is somehow more efficient than GPU rendering? I don't think I'm prepared to accept that claim without a lot more substantiation.

edit: I found this thread here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25616372

I guess the conclusion is that it is really about memory use, but at least 4 years ago, there wasn't a total consensus on the topic.

Nope, I'm not sure about it. I remember when I was using Gentoo about 10 years ago, this was the common reason given for using -O2 instead of -O3 in your build flags, and I'm just speaking from that memory.

Was this a codebase you were working with regularly already? This project exposes a C FFI, so unless you were already working in the guts here, I don't think this should affect you terribly.

edit: I'm actually not seeing the C FFI, looking at the library. It must be there somewhere, because it's being used from a C++ codebase. Can somebody point to the extern C use? I'm finding this inside that `fontations` repository:

  > rg 'extern "'
  fontations/fauntlet/src/font/freetype.rs
  161:extern "C" fn ft_move_to(to: *const FT_Vector, user: *mut c_void) -> c_int {
  168:extern "C" fn ft_line_to(to: *const FT_Vector, user: *mut c_void) -> c_int {
  175:extern "C" fn ft_conic_to(
  187:extern "C" fn ft_cubic_to(
  >

No, but it can often expose undefined behavior that doesn't stop a program from "working" on lower optimization levels.

Which is why I'm in support of always building your own software with -O3.

Rendering is significantly faster and more energy efficient on a GPU.