interstice

What's next on the list of last century sci-fi that hasn't had 100 billion dollars of investment yet?

My 10,000 hours are well behind me and I build web apps a bit like this. Previous jobs are like a shed full of parts that will get 60% of the way there, and the rest is making a couple of custom parts and a lot of fettling. Sometimes I build a table from scratch just to remind myself I can.

Really like this! Funnily enough I was just rabbit holing into terraform + ansible in an effort to do essentially this but with an anycast network. The thinking was to mirror apps across locations with a single deploy. I don't suppose you're plannning something similar with this one?

5% checking in

There’s a difference between making something needlessly complicated and just using meaningful words for the task at hand. The difference between someone who writes eloquently and someone who just writes well, one might say.

1) Will a ticket system help resolve some issues with invoicing meandering email threads

2) Is it possible to create a robust self reinforcing alternative to capitalism from emergent fractal properties (simple rules)

3) Is it worth buying forged pistons so I can turbocharge my classic mini project

4) Is it possible to get a self employed working visa in the Netherlands as an NZ business owner

5) can cheap fresnel lenses be adapted for use as optical waveguides + can waveguides be made from clear epoxy / how hard is it to set up at home metal casting / can I source batteries for my 50kw electric motor / where can I find adaptor for my welder so I can start learning to weld / etc etc

Love it when a metaphor holds up

The line is that there will always be something to do. But I’m not sure that’s true, ultimately each human only has a limited number of needs - once those are met what’s the utility in having any excess capacity?

And what are the chances that we are getting close to that capacity already but the production is so inefficient that only some tiny percentage goes to any one persons actual needs

> what if we run out of data or scaling laws break and algorithmic progress stalls? This is a little funny because similar arguments have been made since the dawn of computers. There was even an argument made once that we had almost ‘solved’ physics. The only constant is change

Interesting take, thinking maybe the author would like ruby.

In my world view being able to program is a bit like having an infinitely long lever. The results of this on the world at large is what you might expect from going around handing out infinitely long levers.

Have used Claude to reverse engineer some minified shopify javascript code recently. Definitely handy for unpicking things.

This appears to focus on mobile devices due to potential chip size reduction, but is there a reason this isn't just as useful as a transistor improvement for desktop chips? Is it slower?

I have found over the years that trying new software risks immediately running into a road block in real use. There will be some detail or complexity or bug on a semi-basic requirement that goes directly to an issue in github.

Dokku is not one of those, it does what it does well and aside from a couple of cli argument ordering quirks it's been great for my light usage. If I was using it more I'd probably want to configure entire architectures with declarative config files, I have no idea if it can do that though.

Degrees of entropy perhaps? CPU's are low entropy in that they are highly ordered and organised - firing only when specifically expected to, whereas brains are high entropy in that they get to a result by riding a fine line between randomness and order and those connections are not inherently expensive.

That and billions of years of optimising for low energy switches.

Neither of those generally results in <1% light reflectance however.

Speaking of ‘yet’ - how does the rapid trajectory of increasingly efficient models like 4o mini fit with this take?

I noticed the final concept doesnt have much (if any) visual cover - which I imagine plays a large part for a prey animal looking for a safe place.

Doctors can be associating what they’ve learned, often with heavy biases from hypochondriacs and not enough time per patient to really consider the options.

I’ve had multiple friends get seriously ill before a doctor took their symptoms seriously, and this is a country with decent healthcare by all accounts.

Human biases are bad too.

Terraformed mars ready for our future corvid derived successors?

As soon as the browser specs catch up to what the bundlers are doing I’d drop them in a heartbeat. Not holding my breath though

Reductio ad absurdum. Possibly

To be fair I’ve had similar issues with Rails

I had this as a kid when my mum used to tell be a bunch of stuff to remember at 7am before she left. Needless to say I rarely remembered having the conversation in the first place

There are two mindsets at play here, the cynics vs the optimists. I’m an optimist to a fault by nature, but I also think there is a kind of Pascals bet to be played here.

If you bet sensibly on the current bubble/wave and turn out to be wrong - well you’re in the same place as everyone else with maybe some time and money lost.

But if you’re right things get interesting.

Does this record audio the whole time or does it start logging when someone starts talking?

My own tests with whisper have average transcription accuracy at best, I mostly want to just not lose important detail because certain people are allergic to writing things down.

I’ve been using an (increasingly complex) DIY solution, tried Rewind last night but it seems more aimed at search than navigating time (I use mine partially for time tracking).

Maybe this is why multi agents are not the answer, or at least not in an individualist proto human sense.

But does every agent have to be completely separate or could this kind of process land somewhere in sub-surface level processing within a single model?

We are already there in some ways with node clusters handling specific subjects at the lowest levels - even being standard human is like being a large collection of processes all running in parallel.

Two space bars?

I’ve wondered if an abundance of processing leads to parts of the brain ‘wanting’ to be utilised at a subconscious level.

Like a bored border collie but it’s the visual cortex

The point I was making is more that just because you can use X amount of energy or resources doesnt mean you might want to.

Therefore - why expect advanced civilisation to be detectable? Just because you could be type 3 doesnt necessarily mean you have to be.

Arguably you might _not_ want to - considering 3 body problem game theory and potentially accelerating the heat death of the universe.

Or maybe they all just leave. Or maybe they don't exist.

So to say its fantasy is essentially assuming we've proved a negative. That's not a hugely rational position to take.

I guess even if that’s the the hope is in the almost but not quite infinite universe someone has gone and done it anyway.

But you’re right, I’m forming the opinion that if you’re that advanced you can essentially choose what size you want to be. And if you can do that - and eg live on the surface of a red dwarf for billions of years - why do you need to be expansionist at all? Is it for the view?