User23

Actually you can do this in the USA.

You can just ask the IRS for your "tax transcripts" and do the data entry. People don't do this because it leaves tons of money on the table.

Now you might say that a tax game that rewards skilled play is bad. But are you sure about that? Because everyone with influence over the system (who all happen to be skilled players) happens to be quite fond of the game, observably speaking.

Voting on this is ridiculous. Obviously we should have AI decide which AI challenges have been met.

That wasn't a proximal cause.

Monetarily Nvidia isn’t creating any money at all.

[delayed]

I had a dream as a kid that my parents had finally bought a Color Macintosh. Imagine how heartbroken I was when I woke up. That MacUser issue for the Mac II was basically torture.

Imagine you find yourself making TC $1M+ a year owning some beloved piece of software.

Do you A) tell your management hey it's absolutely perfect as is, let's just chill, leave it alone and let the money roll in. Or B) tell management about the need for whatever new hotness and you're going to get it implemented ahead of schedule and under budget. And then you do! Oh but the software is objectively worse because it was already perfect.

It's pretty clear what the overwhelmingly popular answer is to that question.

I'm really pleased how wildly all the other commenters are misunderstanding this.

I was counting on this concept as competitive advantage.

But since the algorithm isn't going to surface me anyhow, for giggles I'll say I'm leaning more toward darcs than git.

You should read a little book called Games People Play. Focus particular attention on the section on the game "Indigent."

This isn't a resource allocation problem, or rather, it isn't a resource allocation problem the way you seem to think it is.

This postulates that policy is set by consensus.

Now I haven't done any scientific polling, but my informal anecdotal experience is so overwhelmingly to the contrary that I'm comfortable believing that consensus isn't determining policy here.

> To build a theorem prover you need to take away some capability (namely, the ability to do general recursion - the base language must be total and can't be Turing complete), not add new capabilities. In Haskell everything can be "undefined" which means that you can prove everything (even things that are supposed to be false).

Despite what the fanatical constructivists (as opposed to the ones who simply think it's pragmatically nice) seem to want us to think, it turns out that you can prove interesting things with LEM (AKA call/cc) and classical logic.

This is all of them, properly speaking.

Incidentally, this is pretty much what Algol 60 was designed for and why to this day many academic papers use it or a closely related pseudocode.

How much of Mythos’s internals will researchers be able to recover from the flood of patches?

I've felt for a long time that the field relies rather a bit too hard on absence of evidence being evidence of absence.

SillyMUD branches will always have a special place in my heart. Who doesn’t love leveling up in Sesame Street?!

I meant more that symbols are a data structure with function and value slots. Last I knew strings, interned (which is also a Lisp reference) or not don't have that.

That’s really not true for Lisp.

Ruby, like its predecessor Perl, is one of the finer examples of Greenspunning and shows a lot of Lisp influence.

Unfortunately I can’t read the actual submission right now due to the cloudflare outage.

This has been true in the USA since approximately 1965, at least. Analysis has shown the general public has absolutely no say in policy making; literally everything is for this or that influential “special interest.”

This is borne out in the erosion of what we now euphemistically call the middle class along basically every dimension that matters.

Some of the heat here is on account of members of this community are, or at least are used to being, special interests that have had a powerful voice in previous administrations and less of one in the current one. But let’s not pretend this is some sort of creeping fascism, it’s just a different faction of elites making their own plays.

Has there been a supply chain attack with an LLM conduit yet? Because that would be spicy and is assuredly possible and plausible too.

Asynchrony, parallelism, concurrency, and even deterministic execution (albeit as a degenerate case) are all just species of nondeterminism. Dijkstra and Scholten’s work on the subject is sadly under appreciated. And lest one thing this was ivory tower stuff, before he was a professor Dijkstra was a systems engineer writing operating systems on hilariously bad, by our standards, hardware.

Some people get literally high when running. Some don’t. The get high types invariably posture as if they have more dedication or willpower. Funny stuff.

It took decades to gut American consumer manufacturing. Anyone who thinks it can be brought back without pain is deluded. But nevertheless, it’s worth that pain.

As the Chinese are well aware, every time in history a great financial power and a great industrial power have come into conflict, the industrial power wins.

Given that we basically use the same technique for censuses today, the ancient ones probably weren’t especially less reliable.

Next do ticks.

> You can’t avoid parentheses

Well, you can with reader macros, assuming you’re willing to consider an init file that you only look at when you write sufficiently avoidant.

It’s not done though, because experience has shown it’s not really worth it.

Have you seen LOOP[1]? That example barely scratches the surface too.

As for being able to make words mean different things and break grammatical strictures; that’s called poetry when we do it in English. And yes there is bad poetry, but some is superlative.

[1] https://www.lispworks.com/documentation/lw51/LWRM/html/lwref...

Canonically indented Lisp reads an awful lot like Python. You don’t read the braces, you read the indentation.

I would make a stronger statement and say that this belongs squarely on the effect and not the cause side.

I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Amino acid depletion sounds way more likely to be due to some kind of disruption in homeostasis rather than dietary intake.