Catholics don't formally recognize them but most or maybe all orthodox christian churches do.
5,589 karma · joined December 23, 2021
I am far left, a christian socialist, disabled, autistic, prison abolitionist, recovered addict, formerly incarcerated, and spent many years homeless. I am significantly older than I take the median to be on this site. I often post from these perspectives, which generates a lot of comments to respond to. My views are extreme but I try very hard not to troll or flamebait. I do make jokes but if it seems serious chances are I am sincerely representing my view.
This is draining and sometimes I end up using my handful of permitted daily comments on something less serious. I try to remember to come back around the next day but often forget.
They had originally planned on june and my part is in so…. Me too.
Rust is fine if you need it but most things don’t and ocaml has more convenient abstractions for “regular” work. If you need rust you need rust but ocaml isn’t that far off in perf.
Haskell type system is too expressive, it itself becomes a place for the agent to make mistakes and get bogged down.
* Other “pure” hindley-milner languages are tied but among them ocaml has some particular strengths that I’m sure others will discuss.
Neither are anything like a solo effort in the way these examples are, and it's hard to say what they'd be like without the long individual involvement.
The fact that his writings are still so good and useful and interesting speaks incredibly highly of his powers of perception and skill as a writer. But it makes them nearly useless in a "how ought we to be" conversation, which is one of the main things his works engage with. So it really is a huge problem with his entire project.
They love htmx! Claude will independently suggest using it instead of more general js frameworks for smaller projects. A gpt model told me, and I wrote this down because it was striking, "htmx won the argument it was making."
It's the same thing with rust. I'm an ocaml expert and ocaml genuinely fits a lot of the problems I work with better regardless of that. But because of when the models were trained and what they were trained on, a certain sort of alt-consensus opinion is frozen into them, and it believes rust is a better choice for nearly everything!
I think you're good for the next few years at least. It's an open question what happens after that dead internet theory recursive loop of llms trained on llm output etc so who knows you might be good forever.
Is it not "legitimate" in the same way to kill terrorists?
This is already an extreme perversion of justice all on its own. Damaging military equipment is absolutely outside any useful definition of terrorism. This is simply armed conflict.
But the idea they’d be better than a bigger model is cope, you’re pretty much always better off running the biggest one you can bring to bear within your constraints.
The way vision and language models converge into the same geometric space should be extremely alarming for the "you don't need global knowledge for local tasks" type dreams.
And to be clear I'm not saying that smaller models don't or can't work well, or that we shouldn't be heading in this direction. And it's not quite the case that broad knowledge is strictly necessary. But it never seems to be negative! And so far it is the best way we've found to do... everything. Small models are good to the extent they are like big models, not to the extent that they are small.
I don't believe this very strongly. Again it's a contract issue not a moral one. But the metaphor still holds I think.
It reminds me of matt levine's reframing of insider trading where it's not about fairness it's about theft. You're supposed to get secret insights and use them to get an edge. What you can't do is get an edge for yourself with secret insights that your employer got.
So it roughly comes down to "that data is valuable and rightfully belongs to the originating company." Which then makes this a contract diligence type situation.
The way I use racket its main competitor is python. It's for when I want to accomplish something with heavy third party deps, and I have zero interest in writing the actual cool code I just need to make some libraries kiss and then use my tool. Not saying that's the case here but maybe racket just doesn't offer you much that python doesn't?
Sounds like you'd get more from just using one of the other lisps you liked, especially if there's a more specialized one that wouldn't be competing with a language you probably would prefer to use anyway. Like eg I have to deal with a lot of lua so I get my lisp rocks off with fennel.
We're called engineers brian.
I'm really not sure this is true. Recently for work I've been making changes in a system written in tcl in the early 2000s, including a custom dsl that has never escaped this company. The LLMs can write it fine. It wrote it almost acceptably on first sight, an hour or two of targeted test cases to extract a one page functional spec of the subset we needed and that was it. They are quite good at finding and fitting to patterns, go figure.