Weebs

What these all have in common though, is encouraging shared mutable references, they don't do a lot to make effects in a system explicit, don't encourage a clear organization of code, and many fundamental concepts (functions as values) were missing early on or still are (discriminated unions)

I agree that pretty much any 15 year old code base is going to get rough, but I think these languages have some clear footguns that aren't doing them favors either. I work on a codebase that isn't more than a few years old, and there's complexity issues from simple things like the language lacking good semantics for transforming data immutably, and that complexity spirals

I can attest that writing messy processes in languages that do address these concerns is absolutely possible, I've done so myself, but the mess is contained to a particular area and it's not as hard to follow which pieces of a system feed into another. Things as simple as making immutability the default and mutation explicit like Rust, and requiring modules be organized into a hierarchy like F# are huge wins. As much as I've gotten annoyed with F#'s project files hierarchy requirement because it requires some extra work/considerations for codependent types and codegen, it's amazing how much easier it is to jump into a new codebase where you can clearly see to understand behavior you start with the bottom of the file list, and to understand core logic/patterns you go to the top of the file list

I've always been frustrated that active record ORMs have completely overtaken tools like Linq2Sql.

I don't deny the value of the active record pattern where it works, but in almost every case I've used SQL over the past 5 years, I don't want a complex abstraction layer. I just want something to make it easy and safe to talk to the database for the 90% of straight forward queries we write.

With something like that, I feel as though I'd rather write my own active record system than use the configuration based systems we see with EF

I think the key thing to me here is that these notes are designed to be clicked through without losing track of where you were, and keep the context of why you're reading this current note. The stack concept they have here is really great

I'm prone to winding up with too many open tabs when I use lots of atomic notes with links, and now I'm having to juggle a set of tabs while looking through this information.

I believe you're right, I meant to say React's Hooks, but now I can't find a reference to that so maybe I misremembered. I wasn't interested in previous versions of React after going over the basics in the docs a few times, but after the introduction of hooks I found it more appealing.

I think if we're talking about concepts at the level of OOP, we'd be comparing MVU and virtual DOMs rather than React. I learned to write UIs in F# through Elmish (used by Bolero), which was inspired by (unsurprisingly) Elm. React, also being inspired by Elm, was simple enough to transition to once I was comfortable in Bolero. It was basically MVU with components that have local state and lifetime function callbacks. I ended up tripping over TypeScript/JS more often than React

At the same time, I do know what you mean about the walled garden ecosystems. It seems unfortunate that every framework I pick up, I'm learning a new set of components everyone uses for things like virtualization. On the backend it feels less common to be using a library that's only relevant to your stack, and when there's a killer library in another language, you don't need to move mountains to use it.

I don't worry about the increased concentration of cannabinoids, but I do worry about the trend towards extremely high THC content while other cannabinoids like CBD are barely present.

The high THC and lack of CBD in today's strains is concerning (to me) honestly. I'm worried that a lot of the data we've seen in the past about chronic cannabis use being relatively safe may not apply when THC/CBD ratios approach 50:1, since CBD and other cannabinoids counter act some of THCs effects.

It's unfortunate research was barred for so long (at least in the US), because we could have had a good idea by now what risk factors there are and their warning signs at onset

If there's a will there's a way :) even if unpractical it's definitely a fun thought!

> There was a golden era of reddit right before the great Digg migration

I've been longing for this lately. Even the more interest specific subreddits have gotten noticeably worse and borderline toxic. It feels like it's shifted from a culture of sharing and discussing niche topics or current events with some goofy humor to a slightly more dignified YouTube comment section

I think you provided a great guide for people looking to do the same, I appreciate the write up! Real time audio is a tricky thing to get into and even moreso in the browser, starting with a sine wave here is a great launch point for more experiments.

Is there a way to supply a PeriodicWave a specific wavetable or series of floating points to represent the wave form? It appears from the docs that PeriodicWave is a way to generate waveforms by shaping sinewaves

One problem I've had in the past trying to do audio on the web is I struggled to find any reference material on how to generate my own waveforms and rely on the browser APIs only for playback. This tutorial, with the AudioWorklet, is the first piece I've seen on how to easily do this.

> Everything else is just either incidental, or propaganda.

After seeing a few of your replies on this thread I'd like to comment on this: what I see is someone who's using their own personal beliefs as justification on why something isn't useful, failing to understand others have their own beliefs and situations that make the technology useful to them.

For me, and others, there is a deep value in a decentralized, fault tolerant, fast, global, user controlled, immutable ledger of payments and store of value. You might argue that we have existing centralized solutions to these problems, which you believe are better, but that doesn't invalidate the inherit value I (and others) attribute to such a system. Being able to transact across the world in seconds for less than a bank wire and without a central authority is useful. Yes a centralized authority like PayPal can do it faster and with less resources, no that doesn't mean the decentralized method is useless.

Holdings: 5% of my net worth in various proof of stake coins, hoping to recoup money I lost to inflation not playing the equities game so I can afford a home.

I would even argue that it's a good thing in our current environment that we don't facilitate trade for things that aren't needed. Much of the arguments of deflation seem to rely on an economy that has maintained high and ideally growing output, while we live in a world of resources being depleted due to inefficient use and failure to reign externalities.

I can't speak for Bitcoin's price, but the network's value is a global distributed ledger of transactions (debt) that has proven to be fault tolerant over many years. I think the store of value stuff is a bit of a bubble, and it relies on hodlers keeping the price up over time

> Decentralized Communism

There's not much to point to other than short lived revolutions and communes, or ongoing struggles, such as:

* Aaragon/Catalonia in the Spanish Civil War

* Ukrainian Free Territories in the Russian Civil War

* The ongoing rebellion in the Chiapas, Mexico

* Rojava

* Paris Commune

* Shinmin Prefecture in Korea

And likely some others I am struggling to remember. All of these communities were/are attacked by competing states with enough force that it's hard to get a sense of what decentralized communism would look like outside of an active conflict scenario.

I'm having trouble parsing what you wrote, but I assume you mean that the paper specifically looked at top 1% as defined by earnings or net worth?

My point is that while we frequently use the 1% as a reference for discussions on inequality, the driving force of wealth accumulation isn't that some people make 350k+, and people understandably get caught up in those semantics.

A professional trains nearly 20 years under the guidance of other dedicated professionals to develop the potential to advance technology. The can't get the capital on their own to create technology, and instead sell their labor to ownership class

They go on to develop revolutionary technology. The owner class claims the IP, massively profits, and maybe gives the professional a bonus if they're lucky before being told to get back to work

The rest of us are told to be thankful for the gracious gifts of the owner class, which we buy with undervalued labor we sold to them in the first place

How marvelous

1% is a colloquial way of saying "those who own capital for a living, instead of working for a living". The high income of athletes and highly trained professionals has little to do with our situation. However, most capital and expenditure is controlled by a small group of people that have asymmetric power in employment agreements and political process, and that is concerning

Two main reasons for me

1) More space for my mouse when playing games. I prefer a low sens and full sized keyboards are a legitimate problem for this

2) Desk space. If I'm not playing games it's also helpful to have space for a notebook next to my keyboard when working, or my MIDI controller while making music.

> How many wars started, how many countries destroyed, and how many livelihoods and families ruined for the USD? No one wants to talk about that

That is a huge issue, and I'd love to talk about that. The more people see the world for what it is the better. I don't see how this redirects criticism away from BTC, or how BTC would be immune to the same kind of incentives. The horrendous things that have been done to prop up the USD aren't an inherent property of fiat currency, if an entire nation state had a large stake in BTC would it really be any different?

> yet we are supposed to wring our hands in grief over some extra computers left running

So the fact that we're using as much energy as an entire developed nation to produce <10 transactions per second isn't concerning?

If they're in an area with a higher number of renewables, then possibly yes. I live in an area that gets about half of its power from nuclear, and the other half from hydrocarbons. When I did my research I estimated over a lifespan of some ~150k miles, a Model 3's carbon production would be roughly equivalent to a 43mpg vehicle assuming the grid stays the same. As the grid introduces more renewables, that number continues to climb.

I haven't checked on this in a while, but the most energy intensive portion of overall production seemed to be the treatment of batteries during their production. Development for an alternative to the current treatment process to use significantly less energy seemed promising

Thank goodness for air strafing

I've gotta say though as a beginner, I found ECS more approachable than the Actor/Object systems common in engines. Granted, I do a lot of FP and digesting data, so a series of systems to operate on data is sort of home turf. In the end though, I've been using the traditional OO systems in Unity because most educational resources + documentation are so focused around that

A fully trusted and decentralized financial system is great, but it's not going to change the fundamental power relations that cause so much harm in our society. To me that makes the process not worth it

I believe the research is useful, but to base an international currency around it with these costs is not

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it”

Yes, high powered gaming isn't eco friendly either, but can we please stop ignoring magnitude and utility in this thread?

You can power a typical US household for almost an entire month using the energy of a single bitcoin transaction. What utility does Bitcoin bring with that single transaction? Is it worth the measurable harm it's doing to our ecosystem and human lives?

They're completely ignoring the concept of magnitude, and realistically their claim is "we use energy for other stuff, so there's nothing wrong with using massive amounts of energy for X". They're making an implicit premise that using large amounts of energy, which causes harm to humans, is okay. If you accept that premise, okay fine, but I don't.

As another poster here shared, a single transaction uses upwards of hundreds of kwh. That kind of energy that moves thousands of pounds hundreds of miles, or power a typical US household for almost an entire month.

As others have alluded to, it's more common in FinTech (ex: Jane Street and Quicken Loans). There also seems to be a number of front end devs using Fable + React.

We've been using it in production almost two years now for some backend services to serve as a source of truth for different kinds of data between various servers and applications. It's been a genuine joy for rounding up data, analyzing, and serving it. Half of that is the F# language itself, the other half is being able to use those features on a platform with great debugging + optimization tools, and a huge open source ecosystem to pull from.