reubenmorais
reubenmorais on Hacker News
Yea, that's what I was trying to get at. It is not deterministic because the interpretation is the point. It is how the learner integrates the material. If you don't interpret, then you're not learning, you're just memorizing.
A teacher should therefore embrace the fuzzy nature of explaining concepts.
> explaining concepts while leaving little room for different interpretation is hard
To play devil's advocate: explaining concepts while leaving little room for different interpretation is also pointless. If you don't care about the interlocutor's interpretation, then why are you even talking to them? If the task is really deterministic, then automate it.
Nope, at least the Berlin shop is on RFID on all products.
> I would expect that China would activate their dormant ICS and telco access in such a circumstance to knock the US out of the conflict basically immediately
If they could do this, wouldn't they already have moved on Taiwan?
That's nice if you're starting from scratch, but if you have existing code to deal with, you don't have the privilege of ignoring the insane subset.
Claude Code already does this, you can access it with /resume, /rewind and /fork. I'd imagine building a version that saves in the repo instead of in the home folder would take very minimal effort.
I'm using it on a large set of existing codebases full of extremely ugly legacy code, weird build systems, tons of business logic and shipping directly to prod at neckbreaking growth over the last two years, and it's delivering the same type of value that Karpathy writes about.
If you watch the demo video you can see how they would get this: the model is not aggressive enough. While it doesn't cut you off, which is nice, it also always waits an uncanny amount of time to chime in.
I hate to be the first one commenting to say this, but here it goes: the flashy LLM writing style, "Apple Event Dialect" in the README and in this comment is very recognizable and also quite irritating. If this is supposed to be boring then just state the facts and the benchmarks to prove them.
Nobody has to do anything, least of all massive corporations with country-sized revenues. It's /always/ a choice to comply or to put up a fight and deal with the consequences.
Maybe rather an interactive explanation and exploration environment with embedded programming?
All life is basically refining energy - standing up to entropy and temporarily winning the fight.
From my perspective, if it quacks like a duck...
I can transfer money from Europe to Brazil in seconds with Wise. I press the button and the money is nearly instantly available in the Brazilian account via PIX. The same in the reverse direction is possible but only if you have a more modern bank in Europe, eg. N26 or Revolut.
1.0 is not an upgrade, it's the first stable release. Usually it signifies the arrival of some amount of feature completeness and stability compared to the fast paced 0.x days. Of course semver doesn't really fit neatly most software let alone a user facing GUI application, but socially that's what they're trying to communicate with the 1.0.
This is a weakness of the Python typing system and not necessarily of individual typecheckers. Pyright has a policy of only implementing what's standardized, and the Python type system is simply inadequate to annotate most real world Python code out there. It's been years now and something as basic as properly typing kwargs is still not supported.
Ty could solve this if they rebel and decide to ignore the Python typing standards, which I honestly would appreciate, but if they take the sensible approach and follow the standards, it won't change anything.
Git natively supports excludes in all pathspecs, e.g. `git log -- ':!generated/'` to exclude files in the `generated/` folder from showing up in the log.
In a practical example you'd create a named intermediate type which becomes a new base for reasoning. Once you convinced yourself that the first part of the chain responsible for creating that type (or a collection of it) is correct, you can forget it and free up working memory to move on to the next part. The pure nature of the steps also makes them trivially testable as you can just call them individually with easy to construct values.
> * Can it expand into the layman market?
Maybe it's more enthusiast than layman, and I guess it's also not much of a market, but in the video arrrchival space it's pretty widespread, with people running e.g. Jellyfin behind Tailscale.
I remember never quite getting into Counter-Strike: Source because of the difference in inertia. I had friends who were masters of movement there so I know it wasn't a sloppy game, but my muscle memory from 1.6 just made it feel... uncanny :)
> Would also say what a tryhard is attempting on a server playing every day is going to be a fair bit off from the bulk of people who played through the main game.
Fair, my point is more that in order for it to be possible for mere 12 year old mortals to learn to casually execute these tricks, the game has to have predictable, responsive and reproducible movement. In other words, the opposite of slop.
> And then there are an awful lot of jumping puzzles, shoehorned into a game engine that has way more slop in it than is ideal for such things.
I was taken aback by this comment. The original Half Life engine has super tight and responsive movement, to the point where the average "tryhard" in a server would be executing all kinds of movement tricks that require frame-perfect inputs or very close to it. Watch some speedruns or HL:DS games and you can easily find examples of gameplay involving super precise movement. In CS there was a huge scene of movement based maps like surf_, bh_, and deathrun_.
Makes me think of something in the reviewers setup while playing Half-Life was introducing extra input latency and creating this feel of sloppiness.
> And if someone can trick me into modifying /usr/lib, they can just trick me into replacing Firefox completly with their malwared build, so signing will not save me anyway.
As you said yourself, that's a much bigger hassle and cost. In other words, it's an effective deterrent. Writing to a user owned file is a very low bar for allowing privileged code execution in the browser.
A long time ago browsers used to be infested with all kinds of toolbars and extensions automatically installed by third party software, I for one am glad to not have to worry about that in my computer and on networks I manage or frequent.