gnulinux

It can also be how you think. I think like that (speaking to myself) and I'm not a slow thinker, at least I don't think so... The thing is, when speaking doesn't involve muscle movements, and just a stream of word/concept objects it can be much faster, and also doesn't have to be single-threaded (so to say). But from my subjective experience it feels like I'm talking to myself, one word after the other.

Yes I literally line up one word after the other. As I think, I converse to myself. "Should I do it this way? No, well that's overkill and too difficult. Can I get away with just that? Yeah that's likely fine" I think there are definitely extra-verbal aspects to my thinking e.g. sometimes when I tell myself "how about this" "this" refers to a thought or graph or concept or whatever. Other than that, my thinking is like speaking.

The reality of electron (presumably) is static but our model of electron can change given new data, new information. The reality of our solar system is the same but the way Newton modeled it in his head is different than the way Einstein modeled it in his head (which is ever so slightly different than how a contemporary physicist would model it in their head at the moment).

This has nothing to do with postmodern philosophy. There is a difference between the reality, and a human's conceptualization of that reality. In fact, we can abstract further and say that there is a difference between X and the concept of X. Now, the GP comment is saying that the model of X (which is how a human being conceptualizes X) is different than X. So, when you look at nature as it is, there are no electrons. There are just things that humans happen to model as electrons. We could also happen to model them as something else perhaps inconceivable to us at the moment. But the reality of what-we-call-electron is independent from the concept of electron. This insight is as old as Plato and Kant.

> I imagine poetry as an often misanthropic and lonely hobby with virtually zero demand for it’s output. Whether written or spoken. Moreso now there are LLMs.

(1) In any big city in the US, you can easily find poetry workshops/meeting groups. I'm currently in one (Boston), we read each others' poetry and talk about poetry every week. It's absolutely ridiculous to think there is no demand for poetry, poetry is one of the -- if not the -- oldest art forms, I mean yeah there are people who read poetry even in 2024. My generic bookstore still has a poetry section where I pay $$$ to exchange for poetry books. There is even a dedicated poetry book shop in Harvard Sq (i.e. they exclusively sell poetry books) and they pay the same (expensive Boston) rent any other business pays.

(2) LLMs write dogshit poetry. Comparing a "good" poem with a GPT-4 generated poem is like comparing "2001: Space Odyssey" and "The Room". Other than the fact that they're both arguably "movies" the quality difference is extremely obvious to people who are familiar with this art form.

> Minimalism here doesn't mean "not many notes" it means deliberately restricting the range of harmonic and rhythmic materials available to the composer

This is not necessarily what minimalism means. Minimalism is just an abstraction for certain kinds of art, possibly with various incompatible techniques. For some artists (not just musicians, but also painters, poets etc) minimalism means "repetition"-ism i.e. art with excessive amount of repetition to the point that you'd normally expect it to be "boring" but it somehow uses it to its favor with rhythmic, harmonic, or formal techniques. Philip Glass is the pioneer of this idea in music, and I personally consider him one of the most creative and groundbreaking artists ever lived. His music is very tonal, "simple" and repetitive in his oeuvre (i.e. repetition not just in one work, but repetition among his body of works like minimalist painters Mondrian and Rothko) which makes him a very very controversial musician, some critics considering him a charlatan. To me, he's a Schoenbergian figure who is making a bombastic and over-the-top artistic statement by going against the current of his artistic tradition while remaining firmly in it. Similarly, Schoenberg was also considered a charlatan during his life, especially early on.

For those interested, I recommend this composition: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKJoQ8BfQhw (full on spotify, sorry)

Oh also if you ever think "classical music doesn't have a cultural force anymore" please pay attention to contemporary film music that's not neo-romanticist. You'll see that there is tons of minimalist influence from Glass, Reich, Andriessen, Richter etc...

> So we've seen that this works, but why would anyone think to do this in the first place? The Power of Two Random Choices: A Survey of Techniques and Results by Mitzenmacher, Richa, and Sitaraman has a great explanation. The mathematical intuition is that if we (randomly) throw n balls into n bins, the maximum number of balls in any bin is O(log n / log log n) with high probability, which is pretty much just O(log n). But if (instead of choosing randomly) we choose the least loaded of k random bins, the maximum is O(log log n / log k) with high probability, i.e., even with two random choices, it's basically O(log log n) and each additional choice only reduces the load by a constant factor.

This sounds very powerful! And intuitively doesn't make any sense to me. So, say I have n choices, I do not know which choice is better. Does this result say that it's more efficient to randomly choose k and find the best among them (even for k=2), instead of randomly choosing a single choice? Could someone point me in the right direction?

Very sad day for Western classical music community. Peter Schickele is one of the bigs of the late 20th century WCM and demonstrated that sarcasm and parody can create profound statements in art music. He will be dearly missed by people who listened to his works, and laughed to his performances.

SDL API is used to interface with HTML5 canvas operations so that SDL doesn't need to be compiled: the entire SDL API is literally a primitive in your browser.

Are you aware of the fact that LGPL and GPL are entirely different licenses? Any form of dynamic linking is fair game in LGPL.

Creator must just not be a musician. For a composer, for a pianist, for a violinist, for a singer... etc D# and Eb are distinct things. There are extraordinarily few contexts in music history where their difference is irrelevant, such as some Schoenberg pieces but for literally anything else even for 99% of atonal pieces the difference has some kind of relevance to musicians.

Is there a list of airlines with MAX? I seriously don't want to fly in this death machine ever.

This is an excellent comment and one should also note that the claim is wrong. If one line is changed "a diff" will likely have two lines: one removed, one added. If you change a sentence "I am studying tonight" to "I am not studying tonight" git diff will show one line deleted when I actually didn't delete anything, conceptually.

How is lawfully prosecuting a private company that makes profits off of a vehicle is the same thing as killing someone? Would you agree with literally any punishment against Boeing for cheaping out on their design?

> The technical primitive data structure here is a hashmap where the keys are sorted.

Why not a tree based map instead?

Oof that's a very nasty bug. Is this still relevant in Zig or is there a workaround in the language? I'm not familiar with Zig, heard some good things about it, but this looks like a showstopper.

Wikipedia says that:

> F4 is a paper size 210 mm × 330 mm (8.27 in × 13.0 in).

Which is different than what GP states (216 mm x 330 mm).

"Adaptation" is absolutely amazing of a movie. Kaufman's works are all amazing but I think this one takes the cake. It's so smart and so well executed. I know Nic Cage is a very controversial actor, and I don't doubt he acted terribly before, but this movie is a good demonstration of how incredibly good he really is if he decides to play well, which really strengthens his other works because you always question "did he really mean to do that just now?" like a Schoenbergian "did he really mean to put a minor second at every measure?"

WebAssembly is like an openly designed Java virtual machine that's intended to run on all systems. You're completely confused. WebAssembly is extremely exciting and I believe it'll soon be the thing in the tech industry. With Wasm you can write one app and run it in the following platforms TODAY:

1. Desktop: Linux + Windows + OSX

2. Browsers: Chrome + Firefox

3. Phone: Android (no iOS)

4. Embedded

it's absolutely amazing. The biggest problem nowadays is packaging and various runtime things, but what I listed above 100% works, you just need to do the work to package it in N different platforms. How is this not appealing?

Imagine you write Google Sheets, it works on your browser, on OSX, on Linux, on Windows and on Android. It's the same binary.

It doesn't need to be a fork, you can have your own emacs config, everybody does. Are you familiar with emacs internals?

It really depends, and it's not as simple as you imply. US rice for example has more arsenic than any other rice in the world because US soil has more arsenic in it and rice is an arsenic soaking crop. So, if you eat too much rice, you really should avoid US based rice, it contains unhealthy amount of arsenic. It seems like Thailand based rice has the least amount of arsenic in it but I think we need more comprehensive research on this.

Sources

[1] https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2015/01/how-muc...

[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1892142/

[3] https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/330866/thai-rice-has-lo...

This is really really ridiculous. I've never worked for a company that has releases every day, even every day of the week except Friday. That's not how it works. The most I've seen was 2 days (Tue, Thu) but 3 was fine if you insisted too too much. In my current company we have only 1 day a week release: Tuesday. No other day is allowed or is even possible without someone spending tons of time doing manual things that are supposed to be automated. Moreover, if your code is allowed to be released next Tuesday it has to be merged by 4PM this Thursday. I still spend 100% of my time working, including Fridays. Because not all coding is releasing, and not all software engineering is coding. It's hilarious that someone would think if you're not releasing on day X you're not working. Sounds like straight out of Dilbert cartoon where some management type thinks I'm releasing my code every day.

> how did she get a board seat on OpenAI?

She's the leading academic on the issue of AI safety. It's really ridiculous people don't even know her name and say random things about her, not realizing she's a rock star in her field.

Her leaving the board is a tremendous loss for OpenAI, about as terrible as Ilya leaving the board. These are two giants of AI currently.

Just curious: can they legally sell all their assets to themselves (i.e. OpenAI nonprofit sells it to for-profit OpenAI Inc. for market price real $$$) and then use that $$$ for charitable purposes. Would this satisfy IRS by letting them retain the intellectual property rights?

Goalposts keep being pushed:

* You don't have to care about privacy if you didn't do anything illegal.

* If you do care about it, you can just choose not to share your information.

* If you don't share but your data is still leaked, it didn't affect your life anyway.

The point is an average person is incapable of having boundaries with these corporations who have all their data and benefit from it, and we have no way of predicting how all this data about us will affect us.

> There's no shame in it: academics have grad students, who at least sometimes get a mention in the acknowledgements.

In what field????? In fields I'm familiar, whoever does the research (i.e. the grad student or the postdoc) is the first author, helpers are co-authors and the PI i.e. the main academic who leads the lab is the last author. In what field PI is the first author and grad students "sometimes get acknowledgement"? That sounds like academic fraud.

The overhead of an uncontested lock is not much more than a memory operation but it allows you to be able to use the same code in threaded context in tokio async which is a huge benefit. Unless you need the optimization (i.e. you profiled and determined that Arc in a hot loop is slowing you down) I think it's fine to use Arc in general.

The simplest example [0] (other than Ackerman function et al (i.e. structural recursion) which come up less in practice) is coinduction which can be used to construct infinitely large objects on which you can apply operations that will prove to halt. For example given an infinitely large stream of integers 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, ..., 2*i (i in N) it's trivial to write a halting algorithm that'll sum first N elements of the stream. In short, we need to a way to express that the computation will be bounded by N.

Agda programming language (which requires halting, and therefore is not Turing-Complete) has a robust coinduction support. E.g. in this [1] tutorial you can see it being used to construct decidable languages. A more traditional tutorial to coinduction could be found here [2].

[0] if we count primitive corecursion as "non-primitive recursive" here

[1] https://agda.readthedocs.io/en/v2.6.4.1/language/sized-types...

[2] https://agda.readthedocs.io/en/v2.6.4.1/language/coinduction...

If you can't afford $30 a month, do you really have a business?

I think this is also unrealistic and potentially damaging to the relationship. I have some really bad behavior, I try to be better every day, but yeah I'm bad in some ways. My girlfriend knows this and she accepts but it'd be a lie to say my bad behavior doesn't bother her. And same for vice versa. No one is perfect, especially if you live with them every day in the same house.