pasteldream

I’m not sure why witx’s comment was downvoted. This is absolutely the standard usage in math and computer science.

Yes. I’m not sure how slow it is in Julia, but pure functional languages do tend to generate more garbage for this reason. Hopefully the compiler can optimize it away in simple cases.

Edit: It’s not deepcopying the whole struct, just the parts that need to point to something new. So if you update a.b.c, it will shallow-copy a and a.b, but nothing else.

I think we’re talking past each other.

Lenses serve many purposes. All I’m saying is that in practice, the most common role they fulfil is to act as a counterpart for mutable references in contexts where you want or need immutability.

Can the use of lenses make a program more “composable”? Maybe, but if you have an example of a program taking advantage of that flexibility I’d like to see it.

Yeah, but I’m saying that in 90% of the cases where a functional program would use lenses, the corresponding imperative program would just use references.

> Your natural choice in the "OOP style" is to write a lot of boiler plate to point to each different field you want to get/set.

Your natural alternative to lenses in imperative languages is usually to just store a reference or pointer to the part you want to modify. Like a lens, but in-place.

Immutability gives you persistence, which can be practically useful. It’s not just fear.

Yeah, sorry, I realized after I commented.

But what’s the benefit of this approach? It seems needlessly expensive, both in terms of computational overhead (walking up and down the state tree) and how much more code it requires.

I guess you gain persistence of your entire app’s state (which makes time travel debugging easier) but that’s all I can think of.

You know, I do not actually know that a website had ads before clicking on a link to it; I would be happy to only visit websites without ads.

It’s scummy to shove ads in my face without at least warning me and giving me a chance to leave, I think.

Imagine asking the browser on my hardware to do things I don’t want it to do, and acting shocked when I tell it not to.

Can you point me to one of these reviews of case reports? As it is, your reply is too vague to be helpful.

How much do advertisers pay per customer, and where can I find this analysis?

It’s not a completely arbitrary framing. It’s a consequence of other beliefs (ethical beliefs, beliefs about what you can or should tolerate, etc.), which are ultimately arbitrary, but it is not in and of itself arbitrary.

But naturally, won’t there be people who can’t get to a point where life is okay? Isn’t it deeply unethical to force them to live?

Yes.

I’m sorry Lifeline did that to you.

I believe that if society actually wants people to open up about their problems and seek help, it can’t pull this sort of shit on them.

If you accept that “the world and life aren’t particularly pleasant things”, why do you want to prevent suicide?

> The reason is that they can enable people to take action on their suicidal feelings, before their suicidal feelings are fixed by the treatment.

I see that explanation for the increased suicide risk caused by antidepressants a lot, but what’s the evidence for it?

It doesn’t necessarily have to be a study, just a reason why people believe it.

Agreed - blue noise dithering is very commonly used in computer graphics because it’s cheap and great, but it might be worth mentioning that it’s a kind of ordered dithering, which is mentioned in the article.

Christoph Peters’s free blue noise textures are the most commonly used, for people who can’t be bothered running void and cluster themselves: https://momentsingraphics.de/BlueNoise.html

Sometimes repetition serves a purpose, and sometimes it doesn’t.

> people are far kinder than you may think

Not everyone has this same experience of the world. People are harsh, and how much grace they give you has more to do with who you are than what you say.

That aside, the worst problem with LLM-generated text isn’t that it’s less human, it’s that (by default) it’s full of filler, including excessive repetition and contrived analogies.

Perhaps they disagree with the idea that it’s an addiction or that it’s a problem with screens in particular, rather than a problem with people not being able to or not knowing how to spend their free time in other ways.

One easy way to create such a situation is to use bwrap without --dev.

Reminds me of Falso.

https://inutile.club/estatis/falso/

reference for the unaware: https://youtube.com/watch?v=b2F-DItXtZs

It links to a commit; the removed deps are by GitHub user ljharb.

> The one thing I never understood about these warnings is how they don't run afoul of libel laws.

I’m not a lawyer, but this hasn’t ever been taken to court, has it? It might qualify as libel.

Why did they make it like that? I assume accordion makers were aware of the convenience of the harmonic table layout, and had good reasons for choosing something else.

> the defects of this tuning method became evident and the more flexible “well-tempered” tuning scheme was devised. This ensures that the ratio of pitch between every two adjacent notes is precisely the same.

The author seems to have confused well-temperament and equal temperament.

It is also odd that he calls just intonation a “simplification” of Pythagorean tuning.