Are there statistics on the scale of compute available to GIMPS for this search? Is there any evidence that by crowdsourcing the clients, we are searching faster than, eg, a dedicated cluster financed by a government or a corporation? What is the impact of GIMPS as a distributed problem solving tool? Like, if there was a practical application, how much money would it take to exceed GIMPS throughput, that curious people provide for free?
I’d like it to be astronomical, but given the niche of this, and the low cost of cloud compute, the answer is predicable depressing, like, “$50k/year in AWS costs would equal current GIMPS search throughput”
Umm. Well, mostly because tiktok is the only major social media company associated with a government that has a history of trying to steer US elections one way or another.
Prose writing in any form is super useful. The challenge is having a unified tool to impose some structure. Instead, thoughts are divided across email, slack, confluence, quip, etc.
This is the way. I’ve used zettelkasten, which is similar philosophy. Dump a thought and tag it for retrieval later. I prefer making this work with simple files and markdown. I have a colleague who uses email drafts well. My problem with OneNote and similar is the bloat of it. But, having images alongside text, when needed, is super nice.
I don’t think I could ever switch to a windowed app as editor, vs a TUI, eg neovim. The remote story is never great for me. It forces your editor to slowly bloat to become your entire IDE. Native remote dev using tmux is so nice. Can anyone persuade me otherwise?
Evidently this is all very new to you, sounding slightly histrionic.
The zed complaint is purely about it be auto enabled. For each language there is usually a standard and at least one tool. Most people want formatting and can’t stands code bases where sometimes it’s a single quote, sometimes a double quote.
Assuming you’re serious and not just trolling - what even is wokism, aside from a name thrown at people you disagree with? Bigotry is a known, studied phenomenon. Are you saying there is not a natural tendency to prefer one’s own kind and mistrust foreigners? Are you saying that groupthink respects no particular ideology?
Glad that auto formatting tools like black and ruff (at least in Python world) are increasingly becoming the norm. It’s really nice to not think about whitespace or humor these silly arguments.
Maybe true for pure software projects. There are other things in tech - robots, from drones and cars to rockets, for example. There are complicated systems that will never, even with banger LLMs, be designed and executed by a small team. Some teams are lightweight and agile and manage to work magic. Maybe tools will help a little there… not so sure. Systems of systems has boggled planners since the first Apollo program, at least. It’s roughly the same approach today.
I guess I don’t quite get it. It’s not a ton of work for me to manage things with git, symlinks, and a makefile. Clearly chezmoi adds some polish and maybe additional features, but I don’t see how that outweighs learning a custom tool for this one thing.
This is the answer. The thread is chasing various smart-people opinions about languages, interpreters, system calls. We got tricked into click bait title and are using the opportunity to rehash our favorite topics and biases.
I constantly get low key shade for choosing to build everything in Python. It’s really interesting to me. People can’t break out of thinking, “oh, you wrote a script for that?”. Actually, no, it’s software, not a script.
99% of my use cases are easily, maintainably solved with good, modern Python. The Python execution is almost never the bottleneck in my workflows. It’s disk or network I/O.
I’m not against building better languages and ecosystems, and compiled languages are clearly appropriate/required in many workflows, but the language parochialism gets old. I just want to build shit that works and get stuff done.
They’re not deprecating UTC. Did you read the link? They’re deprecating functions that read as authoritative, but are actually naive about timezones, which can less to non-UTC results.
This looks promising. What would be disappointing is after listening to a few episodes is slowly revealed that the authors/creators actually do reveal some sort of bias, negative or positive. Any bias would be annoying, from the somewhat trendy denigration of Western philosophy as the mainstream contender for the target audience (I realize I’m making some, I think reasonable, assumptions about the audience), to a Trojan horse of selling Christian philosophy.
The time scales involved! There is no known physical mechanism by which we could ever share information with this galaxy and have any semblance of “now”. It’s just impossible, as far as our science knows. That’s humbling. It’s a yawning chasm.
Very cool! The extra context is appreciated - seeing the two galactic neighbors , their proximity and relative sizes. In fact, these articles would be that much more meaningful to me if they included different resolutions and views of the same look direction. Seeing something for the first time at best resolution is great, but seeing it in context helps one better appreciate the achievement of JWST.