eventualcomp
eventualcomp on Hacker News
Yeah, the entire piece feels like Madlibs for analogies, where one totally disregards the emotional aspect of the substitutions.
I think this is a piece by rationalists for rationalists that escaped the niche it was supposed to remain in.
There was a very interesting video? Article? About how the reason Twitter is so hostile is because it blends people who do not have shared contexts, so ideas are taken out or context and land poorly. This feels like that.
Legal culpability is one of the few motives for working appropriately on misalignment. If I/my startup can self-absolve from an infinite paperclip machine problem while getting rich off of it, why should I not?
I would like to define my own thresholds for exploration/exploitation so that I can shape the person I want to be, thanks.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48945241#48951538Quoting myself here: Amazon is heterogeneous. So much so, that positive anecdotes and negative anecdotes are near worthless without specifying the org. I don't want to name bad orgs but what org are you talking about?
> created in under 15 minutes
This is an artificial constraint that does not serve the reader. Where did the 15 minute constraint come from?
That is an orthogonal matter and maybe my imagination is limited. But when I think of realistic new flags I do not think of a union jack missing its right diagonal in the corner (e.g. if we decide to decompose the UJ primitive).
We could also complain that the crescent is a complex primitive. Why not define it with three parameters: two circle radii with a center offset?
Choosing the primitives is hard and requires domain knowledge/taste, and finding a simple enough implementation solving for key usecases (e.g. decent coverage of maps, meaningful bit encoding) and descoping (e.g. deciding on no emblems) is also hard.
But I am personally impressed with the primitives the author created and the scope simplifications done to achieve it.
Maybe there's an allegory to the sciences. But I rather a model be suboptimal in encoding that can be used to generate hypothetical reasonable flags in its unpopulated states, than having an optimal encoding which doesn't answer questions or reveal possibilities in its unpopulated states. Like what does flag #0xFE look like in an 8-bit encoding? I really like the idea of driving compressed trees in reverse with random data to generate new fascinating (valid) sequences.
Also, for compressing into 8 bits - is this not like saying "I can compress all of Shakespeare's plays in 6 bits" because there are ~39 plays, but then the size of the "shakespearezip" is just the sum of the works?
I think if nuclear weapons were unregulated then we would probably have blown up by now.
I feel like there would either be too many locks or too much contention on something like /var/log or /tmp if that API was ever exposed to userspace.
Waiter, waiter! More optimization articles without benchmarks, please!
Thanks for commenting and acknowledging that it's challenging. My mates and myself have definitely fallen into this. Reminds me of that hackernews post about how doomerism is a siren's song for genZ, forget where it is.
Almost 6 years old. (2020).
Devs gotta eat. Yeah the code is out there but the code is a result of a lot of thinking, prioritization, research into what is needed from the actual product. So now AWS owns that mindshare and talent and will (probably heavily) influence its decisions. I just hope DuckDB doesn't stray from its goal of being the SQLite (e.g. embedded) OLAP.
> I declined to take that offer. I had missed several business meetings that cost me actual money. I couldn't donate blood for years because I had been to the Amazon and was tagged a malaria risk.
RTFP?
Checked the contributor list, please disclose that you're a primary contributor.
No such thing as a too-low risk to reward ratio. That's basically free rewards.
Why are we citing novelists for appeals to authority on something like intelligence. I thought this might be a figure on developmental psychology to give value to your comment, but it's not even that. Should I be citing George Orwell's doublethink to counter you?
Did you deliberately not address the prices skyrocketing comment? Not that the price is what it is, but that the price changed?
If I could install PVE on my M series Mac, nothing would make me happier. It would be such a nice way to recycle such hardware once I finally upgrade.
I just use Amazon Ion as my JSON superset of choice for my own sanity, and downconvert to JSON when (if) it matters, it's not even bad and it supports comments. Hell there's a freaking Lisp for it now, too (Fusion).
https://ion-fusion.dev/Given also that it's a big tech technology I am going to wager that it's not going away anytime soon.
If I had a nickel for every post I saw on HN front page involving companies confusing people on phishing-like patterns today, I would have two nickels. Which is not a lot but still weird that it happened twice.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49172834
A few days multiplied by the number of skills I once had translates to well over two months of lost time.
Programming without writing, to me, feels like doing mathematics by reading proofs but not doing proofs. Which quite frankly works very poorly for me. I write code if, for nothing else, so that I can spot bad code/proofs with an easier time, rather than dealing with an equation that blew up in prod.
no mention of dynamic programming for dealing with recursive functions? Dynamic programming was built for this, you don't even need to thrash the heap as much as that trampoline. Instantiate your array, make sure you set your base cases and loops so that you don't step in an `undefined` hole, and then recurse in reverse.
Is this a response to marketing lingo specifically or some other cultural phenomenon? There's a difference between what you want to do to advance your goals (e.g. compromising), and what you want to say for visibility for whoever's goals they are (e.g. "uncompromising" the customer's goals).
There might be a deeper point being communicated, not sure, but I see no issue here.
Why? Why do people submit content for our reading when it is not their words? Does it give legitimacy to them? Does it push an agenda? Does it make you look professional? Is this for some kind of executive or boss?
"The part I have to be Fair about" "Why it did this", "Why this should bother you", "honest framing", ...
The things you are doing differently are not legitimate guardrails either. An AI article warrants AI-generated criticism, so I'm not going to say more.
Any mechanism you find that can do this could also be used for money laundering, no? By way of identifying that money laundering in the US should not be possible (meaning without legal consequence), then this too should not be possible.
Ad hominem is good for the heart, I hear.