jdougan

> most supervisors try to discourage students from writing in this way because there is a delicate art to it that you are unlikely to be able to meet at that career stage.

And it seems to me they will continue to to unlikely to meet it if they don't get any practice at it. Which loops back to being another pedagogical problem.

I find dogwhistle arguments interesting. If someone is hearing dogwhistles, maybe they're the dog.

Smalltalk has #reject: which does that. You could, of course, just wrap a not around the test in the closure, but sometimes reject with a well-named predicate is easier to read.

bsnpApproved := tvShows reject: [ :eachShow | eachShow hasNaughtyContent ].

Ruby inject appears to be derived from Smalltalk #inject:into:

#(1 2 3 4 5 6 7) inject: 10 into: [ :sum :each | sum + each squared ].

or from your example:

someHash := myArray inject: (Dictionary new) into: [ :accumulator :item | ... ].

The way I remember the order is it reflects the assignment you'd do is a while loop, sum := sum + each.

The EMP effect depends on there being atmosphere to generate electrical fields from the bomb gamma flux. Being close enough and line of sight from the atmosphere can be sufficient to generate the effect in the nearby atmosphere. 400km is apparently the optimum height for coverage but not strength. Too far and inverse-square ensures the flux isn't sufficient. So just detonating a bomb "in space" may not do anything depending on the direct path distance to the satellites in question (the bomb gamma flux etc. of course poses its own threat). Look it up, the physics are interesting.

I'd love to see them go back all the way to the Apple I eventually.

So, how can we get this unwound, or at least properly compensated?

Smalltalk does something similar. Maybe that syntax would be better for him?

And these extensions are for what use cases?

I wonder if this could be practical for controlled environment devices like game consoles.

I'm curious as to how time efficient that actually was.

Humber encoding?

Reminds me of the Xanadu Humber encoding.

I was always partial to the “make Wednesday a second weekend” plan. No more hump day and 2 “Fridays”. Of course that is also 2 “Mondays”

alternate futures where the 33bit versions of the i960 became the processor family of choice.

If you go through old CS OS texts on the matter, they really didn't have the same understanding of capabilities then as the later object-capabilities (ocap) model would introduce. Typically they would show an access control matrix, note that acls were rows and capabilities columns and note that they are duals of one another. They're the same, acls are easier to manage, done.

OP is arguably the first paper that introduces ocaps. Some of the issues are discussed in "Capability Myths Demolished" https://papers.agoric.com/assets/pdf/papers/capability-myths...

I'm seeing about 9 comments, all flagged dead. Do you have showdead on?

At a guess, looking at his history, it's AI slop. Basic facts appear correct though.

In some of the draft versions of ASCII the positions currently taken by underscore and caret were left arrow and up arrow respectively. As late as 1985 I used terminals (LanparScope) the supported the older draft.

Being a full-time writer has always been a tough gig unless it is attached to an institution (but that can corrupt the writing). I'm not sure why anyone would think it wasn't tough. The author/poet/painter starving in a garret was a well known stereotype. Just like most of the arts there is a supply and demand imbalance; lots (claim to) want to write, only a few will actually write to completion, and only a few of those will have written something someone else wants to read. And that's before the traditional publishing funnel.

On the other hand, I've known writers who make it work. Larry Correia has a lot of useful thoughts about it, he used to be an accountant before he got into writing and brings those skills to his analysis.

eg. "Analyzing My Royalties" https://monsterhunternation.com/2022/02/08/analyzing-my-roya... he breaks down how the system works. Claims to be making Doctor/Lawyer level money as of 2022.

I would like to see an analysis including "non-traditional" publishing options, and how different kinds of writing sell. I suspect genre fiction is different from "literary" from non-fiction, etc.

Nothing new under the sun. "Put that there" demo, 1982.

https://www.media.mit.edu/publications/put-that-there-voice-...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyBEUyEtxQo

Or for that matter, the magic that was a Tektronix storage scope terminal (and compatibles. At school there was a vt10x that had been modified to act like a Tek 4014 by some third party).

Exactly. Most microcomputer BASICs were a live environment IDE, except done with a CLI.

Hemingway's style had a lot of influence. It would not surprise me if text influenced by it is widespread in the LLM training corpus.

Look up the WW2 FP-45 Liberator. A bad gun you could use to get a better gun. Theoretically you only need to use it once.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator

Smalltalk keyword message syntax seems to be in a middle ground

Culturally they're not really the same organization. JPL has a different culture than Goddard, which is different than Marshall, etc.

I'm still of the opinion that the right direction is something architectEd more like NeWS with better underlying language support. If you're going to break stuff make it a real improvement.

Did they get the sulfurous compounds out as well?

Did they do anything to fix the OpenSmalltalk VM lamentable keyboard input?