Would you be willing to pitch why you like jj and find it useful? How were you using git?
I use git mostly on single-dev projects, with branched development patterns.
Would someone like me with a simple git use-case find JJ enjoyable?
859 karma · joined April 8, 2023
I use git mostly on single-dev projects, with branched development patterns.
Would someone like me with a simple git use-case find JJ enjoyable?
Listing a few challenges of a phoneless life doesn’t negate the point that one can still exist without a phone, even in 2026.
I started meditating recently (~10mins per day) and have found it to be surprisingly effective. It’s a combination of body scanning & mindfulness meditation.
It doesn’t always help, but tends to.
https://youtu.be/glWvwvhZkQ8?si=-HGtfd_KHYfatEQ
Although it’s focused on Ilya, some great history is covered.
I think this is a direct result of OpenAI and Anthropic humanizing these models too much.
I want C-3PO by my side helping me work, not a machine acting emotional.
But that’s what they’ve given us, and now a huge fraction of the username treats these tools like a human.
And I’m asking you in good faith - not trying to argue.
I’m thinking about these types of questions on a daily basis, and I love to see others thinking about them too.
Otherwise, I love your advice. Thanks.
It’s ok for the mind to wander a bit, and we are lucky to be in a time during engineering where the ability to think has become a priority.
I really love the “brief moments” part too. I believe growth (maturation, skill improvement, etc.) happens in discrete moments that is then reinforced by practice (or lost by the lack thereof).
> stuck at some ceiling… next step forward
Then they weren’t at their ceiling :) they were at a local minimum of optimization. And getting out of a local minimum is insanely rewarding, regardless of the skill.
And maybe you’re right - maybe there is no hard ceiling. But there are learning rates and diminishing returns involved. It might take me 10x longer to get from the 95% percentile than 96% percentile, and then 100x to get to 96.5%. (Obviously percentiles are quite abstract for art). Maybe we can always improve given the right practice and guidance, even if the improvement is marginal. I just define the marginal returns area as a “ceiling”.
But… all of this can co-exist with “natural” baselines of talent.
I hate to admit that I will never be as “good” of a pianist as Martha Argerich… but I just won’t be, no matter how much I practice. I also will never be able to run as fast as Noah Lyles, no matter how much I train.
And that’s ok.
I think there is a tendency to fight back against the idea of natural talent/skill because this idea can diminish the extreme hard work it takes to hone and develop talent.
Noah Lyles could outrun 99% of us without training, but he had to dedicate his life to beat the last 1%. Most people probably don’t realize/understand how much dedication it takes to climb that final mountain.
But “inherent” talent is still a real thing. If we knew “why”.
My final thought is that high baselines can often be counterproductive for growth. Anyway, thanks for chatting about this with me.
But there’s still a starting point and ceiling in intrinsic ability.
I’m curious why you think there’s no difference in inherent abilities? Some people are more “naturally” skilled at some things than others, at a baseline. You can look to see examples of this everywhere.
That doesn’t negate the dedication/sweat/tears of people who have high skill, but many of those people also started several miles ahead.
I do a lot of work in R and find codex (5.4 & 5.3-codex) just totally drop the ball with R. Anthropic’s models are far better with R, so I use them.
But I do wonder how much the harness affects performance.
Would GPT-5.3-Codex perform just as well if it was plugged into CC?
1. The main page asks for an email to be notified when the hoodie is available to buy, but I can add the goodie to my shopping cart and proceed to check out 2. The product page mentions a 6’ model but there is no model in the images 3. The check out page says “there are no payment options, please contact us”
I’m thinking of doing the same thing, as I want everything on my home NAS and not iCloud/Google Drive
I am stunned to see that LoC risk assessment.
I kept wondering to myself over the past week, “will this be the last USA-supported human space travel if these astronauts don’t survive?”
I’d have a hard time imagining the general public would support any future missions if they hadn’t survived.
These astronauts are some elite humans. My respect for them is even greater now that I’ve seen the risk quantified.
I’d love to learn more about the technical challenges. For example, how do they handle buildings that aren’t perfectly aligned to the cardinal axes?
I’m not a professionally trained SWE (I’m a scientist who does engineering work). LLMs have really accelerated my ability to build, ideate, and understand systems in a way that I could only loosely gain from sometimes grumpy but mostly kind senior engineers in overcrowded chat rooms.
The legality of all of this is dubious, though, per the parent. I GPL licensed my FOSS scientific software because I wanted it to help advance biomedical research. Not because I wanted it to help a big corp get rich.
But then again, maybe code like mine is what is holding these models back lol.
I do not buy this argument. Of course, most of the content on these platforms is innocuous, and may as well be paint drying.
What's harmful are the harnesses that these companies have built to exploit the content.
> Of course not. Because infinite scroll is not inherently harmful.
Yes it is [0].
> Autoplay is not inherently harmful. Algorithmic recommendations are not inherently harmful.
Yes, they can be [1] [2].
> These features only matter because of the content they deliver. The "addictive design" does nothing without the underlying user-generated content that makes people want to keep scrolling.
These harnesses only work because people feed the machine. The harnesses are still harmful.
This whole argument is predicated on a strawman that makes no sense.
A gun doesn't work without bullets. But if a company designs and hands out the gun to the world, they should be liable for the consequences, even if they rely on users for the ammunition.
[0] https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580729
By reading the book first, you’ll have a better background and understanding of the context of the plot, the science, and the overall objectives of the mission. There are also several “twists” in the book that were cut from the movie for runtime.
I enjoyed the movie after reading because I got to see the story “come to life”.
But I could also understand the perspective of enjoying the movie first, and then having the story/world expanded 8x with a 16hr book.
You’d could equate “movie -> book” order to watching the LoTR standard editions first, and then watching the extended editions.
I listened to the audiobook narrated by Ray Porter (on Audible) and would recommend that production if you enjoy audio.
I don’t think you can go wrong either way :)
My wife and I saw the movie this weekend, we thought it was great. I adored the book, yet I recognize a book can’t be perfectly translated to the screen.
I thought the directors did a good enough job at translating the sci-fi into something the masses would enjoy.
Kudos to you
“NIH” here refers to “Not Invented Here” Syndrome, or a bias against things developed externally.
“This entire month I’ve been feeling good, I want to pinpoint why,” or “it’s clear since stressor X entered my life, my affect is lower; how can I resolve this?”
These long term trends are harder for me to track without data. It might be easy for others, but not me!