lambda_garden

> These two statements are contradictory. If it was indeed so "poor", people would notice :)

Would they? The history of programming is full of great ideas that took a very long time to reach mainstream adoption. We also did some things that in hindsight were bad ideas, but for a time were very popular.

This is because the programming language "market" is not rational. It moves at the speed of education, not the speed of innovation. People learn a language and they make useful things with it. Why would they stray into niche languages and PL research?

Kinda. F# is modeled after OCaml. OCaml and Haskell are both modeled after ML. I suppose you could say they are cousins.

F# is basically statically-typed Python (with better performance).

What's strange is that Java predates Go and has all of these attributes. C# too, for that matter.

> they liked something about Python

I think it's simply what they already knew. Very few programmers learn multiple languages to any kind of depth.

Is there any evidence that Python is an easy language to learn? I think we've reached a situation where beginners learn Python because it's seen as beginner friendly... because beginners learn Python!

Ironically, we had more advanced languages than Go in the 70s.

Python is valuable due to the ecosystem of libraries it offers. The language itself is extremely poor. I think this is not something most Python users are aware of since if you are doing ML, data-science or simple scripting there is little reason to step outside of the ecosystem.

- Weird scoping rules

- Very limited list-comprehensions

- Ability to monkey patch things is a liability

- Mutability by default

- Lack of support for functional programming

- Deployment story remains extremely painful

- Tacked on type-system

- Slow execution of pure Python code

If this sounds like a rant... it sort of is. I find it really sad that so much programmer effort is being put into something with poor fundamentals. Many of these issues cannot be fixed with breaking changes.

Some in the ML community think a simpler language has advantages over a more expressive one, in some cases.

For example: https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/243#issu...

I believe in second chances. From the GitHub link:

> EDIT 5 years later: You can see in the edit history of this comment what I originally wrote here; I was upset and said unkind things that I regret, and which nobody deserved to hear. I apologized at the time and I still feel I should apologize again, unequivocally. I was in the wrong here.

What a horrible idea.

OpenAI has not released AGI.

Unity and MonoGame are not really comparable. Unity is a game engine that is also an IDE, whereas MonoGame is simply a set of libraries.

The content pipeline is optional in MonoGame. You can load assets directly from ttf, png, etc.

You can also run the content pipeline as a .NET tool outside of Visual Studio. It works on Linux too.

Money. If you can pay, exceptions will be made for everything else.

A good breakdown.

There are also a handful of true grammar schools left. These are free to attend, but are selective based on ability. There is debate about the extent to which raw ability is really being tested, and not preparedness for the test.

There are also private schools that call themselves grammar schools. These were once free and selective, but converted to fee-paying at some point. They like the prestige of being called a "grammar" but don't be fooled!

The lack of true grammar schools has been a big hit to social mobility in the UK. Now, getting into a grammar requires not just passing a test, but also having parents rich enough to buy a house in the catchment area. Public school alumni dominate top industries and government.

The UK "free school" approach has been a mixed bag. On the one hand, various academy chains have managed to turn around failing schools. On the other, some parents are left with no choice but to send their child to a religious school due to catchment areas and waiting lists.

As a tax payer, I don't want my contributions going towards religious institutions.

The loss of "special schools" for students with severe special needs has not helped anyone (imo).

Yes, I disagree.

Anecodtally, I see motorists driving whilst using their phone on a daily basis. I rarely see cycling jumping red lights. I also see motorists jumping red lights, but rarely. I frequently see motorists on the wrong side of the road trying to skip traffic queues.

But you claim was about recklessness.

Poor driving is much, much more reckless than poor cycling, given the kinetic energy involved.

> as much as cyclists hate to hear it, they're the most reckless users of the road on average

Citation needed.

It's better than it was but still terrible.

Evaluative and generative models are not so different. Often, one is the reverse of the other.

Legend.

The X-risk crowd need to realize that LLMs, whilst useful, are toys compared to Skynet.

The risk from AI right now is mega-corps breaking the law (hiring, discrimination, libel, ...) on a massive scale and using blackbox models as an excuse.

Title is misleading. They weren't banned because they "teach Python. " but because Meta has faulty algorithms.

Maybe something clever could be built into a web app?

Indeed.

You get paid to deliver more value to someone than you cost them (or someone else might cost them!)

Whether or not you have fun has little to do with it.

Effective Altruism is a charity / social club / networking opportunity for young STEM types based on pretty extreme beliefs about Utilitarianism and recently AI. The most famous EA right now is probably SBF.

Accelerationism is the belief that we should race towards catastrophe so that we can rebuild society in a better way.

E / Acc is a (sometimes ironic) amalgam of the two.

You won't be surprised to learn that not many in these groups have studied history.

Why is "written in C++" part of the headline?

As engineers we focus too much on the implementation details and not the benefits to the user.

How about:

- ZooKeeper alternative with lower latency

- ZooKeeper alternative with lower memory use

- ZooKeeper alternative with predictable overheads

(I don't know if these are true, just suggestions)

Since some action depend on the branch / tag you are on this is not always possible.

Option 1 is required if you want to have steps on different runners, add approval processes, etc.

I always opt for option 2 where possible though.