adambard
With this in mind, how concerned should we really be about a pre-registered list of unverified plugins? The only new information exposed is the URLs of these various plugins, is this information so private if it was already registered in their list to begin with?
By the same token, often it takes a stab at generating code based on something's name (plus whatever context it's looking at) and does a better job than the IDE could, because the IDE just sees datatypes and code structure. It really does feel like a complementary tool.
Copilot (the existing gpt-3 one) definitely helps at writing unit tests. Yeah, sometimes it doesn't nail it, but one thing it can do reliably is to repeat a pattern, and I don't know about you, but my unit tests tend to repeat the same pattern (with some tweaks to test this-or-that-case). Quite often it infers the correct change from the name I gave the test method, but even if it doesn't it'll write a 90% correct case for me. I imagine the GPT-4 version will do more of the same with better results.
It cannot replace reasoning, but it can augment it (by suggesting patterns and implementations from its latent space that I hadn't thought of), and worst case it can replace quite a bit of typing.
Long-term, it remains to be seen how far bigger/better/stronger LLMs can push the illusion of rationality. In many fields, they may be able to simply build their ability to pattern-match to beyond some threshold of usefulness. Perhaps (some subset of) programming will be one of them.
This strikes me as a bizarre take. What do you consider a "suburb"?
Unfortunately, toxic content is a lot harder to regulate than toxic chemicals, when one man's truth is another man's fake news.
We now know what it takes to protect a person from COVID in an environment where they are likely to be exposed to significant virus concentrations; unfortunately, getting kids to scrub up like COVID ward nurses is probably not realistic.
ADHD is a category of psychiatric diagnosis; psychiatric diagnoses exist to address deficiencies in function. Separating the one from the other, as you perceive, renders it meaningless -- or perhaps, useless. If one happens to have some of the traits of ADHD but it doesn't affect their life negatively, so what?
[1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-ma...
The only thing stopping me from spending more money on games is the fact that I expect it to just evaporate one day and take the games I "bought" with it. Moving to a licensing arrangement to let me play the games I already own/could retain even if Stadia goes away, would help a lot in this regard.
{
tag: "button",
attributes: {
"id": "baz",
"class": "foo bar",
"data": "1",
"onclick": f,
},
children: [
"Hello",
{
tag: "em",
attributes: {},
children: ["there"],
}
]
}
[:button#baz.foo.bar {:data 1 :on-click f} "Hello" [:em "there"]]I have seen lineups out the door and around the block on this occasion. I think this illustrates very well people's well-known tendency to irrationally value free stuff.
I've yet to see the equivalent of Django or Rails when it comes to rapidly assembling a database-backed CRUD app in a statically typed language.
The JVM and .NET are presently about the same capability-wise, but Java is (or at least, is perceived as) much easier and cheaper to freely experiment with. Unless you need to use C# for some deep Windows integration, this makes Java the obvious choice for anyone without sunk costs in the .NET ecosystem.
- Keywords (i.e. `:vehicles`) can be used as getter functions, as covered in the OP.
- mapcat (like most collection functions in clojure) treats `nil` as an empty sequence
I think this is pretty much it. Behavior is learned. The participants were playing the game in a way that was irrational when viewed in isolation, but natural in the context of their lives.
If the commons takes more than it gives, it becomes irrational to participate. This tendency persists and spreads over time and people and eventually crystallizes into an aspect of morality, where collaborating with the (exploitative or oppressive) commons is viewed with suspicion and distrust (think "Party Officials"). Eventually this habit becomes so ingrained that it emerges even during simple games.
- Linq is great but less unique than it once was, and almost everyone has async and await (or some equivalent) now -- javascript & friends and python almost exactly, and Java has a wealth of options in this arena.
- .NET is "multiplatform", but clearly second-class in terms of tooling and perf on non-windows platforms.
- Congratulations on the open-source licence?
- This one is legit, but other languages do some pretty interesting stuff too
- VS might be ahead in this regard, but Java IDE's aren't far behind, and even the dynamic languages are starting to get really impressive tooling.
I have used and liked .NET, but I have no need to pay the premium it imposes. .NET is just another very capable platform among very capable platforms -- and then throw in the single-ecosystem thing.
I suspect in my case that this has a lot to do with how people who are browsing porn use Reddit, versus how people use the rest of the site at large. Most subs moderate posts and discussion actively and have norms (and moderators) that act against posting frequently, cross-posting and self-promotion. On the other hand, most porn subreddits are quite happy to accept x-posts, self promotion, etc, because their goal/approach is to provide more porn faster.
This seems to be an emergent property of Reddit rather than a deliberate strategy, but they seem happy enough to keep the revenue coming (as am I).
That said, Lisp writers also use macros every day -- for example, in Clojure, only `if` is defined as a special form, and other conditional operators (`when`, `cond`, `case`, `condp`, `if-not`, etc.) are implemented as macros that use `if` under the hood. Good macros are almost necessarily difficult to implement, because they're deployed to solve problems that functions can't, but if done well they can be easy to read and use.
def func1(q: Option[Int], z: Option[Int]): Int = {
(for {
qval <- q
zval <- z
} yield q + z).getOrElse(0)
}