roveo
If the project is not throwaway, this first set of iterations is critical, without guidance LLMs will just bolt on things and produce special-cased spaghetti, even the very-frontier models.
Once the framework is established, it's smooth sailing.
But I haven't gotten to "very large" size yet, I expect it produces another kind of coherence problems.
When I stopped reading X, I had this thought one morning:
> The political crisis, the bloody war, the looming apocalypse only exist to distract you from the fact that you didn't fold the laundry.
The longer I live news-free, the more I find it true.
After a while they just stopped trying and decided that it's less reputational damage to just let it be.
I've been thinking about this a lot lately. I'm a data analyst and all these "give GPT you data warehouse schema, let it generate SQL to answer user's queries" products completely miss the point. An analyst has value as a curator of organizational knowledge, not translator from "business" to SQL. Things like knowing that when a product manager asks us for revenue/gmv, we exclude canceled orders, but include purchases made with bonus currency or promo codes.
Things like this are not documented and are decided during meetings and in Slack chats. So my idea is that in order to make LLMs truly useful, we'll create "hybrid" programming languages that are half-written by humans, and the part that's written by LLMs when translating from "human" language is simple enough for LLMs to do it reliably. I even made some weekend-prototypes with pretty interesting results.
Modern English lost the "n" part, but it was present in Middle English, milne.
Or you could make a "check your input one more time before confirming" step and display typos in e.g. names/emails there.
And what people also don’t understand is that they falsify on all levels. First, they persecute their opponents and deny them access to media. If they think an opponent has a chance and isn’t sufficiently toothless, they just don’t register them. Then they cast fake ballots during actual voting. There are reports of fraud during counting: police is known to remove independent observers from the room. If the results at this point are not satisfactory enough, they rewrite the numbers in counting protocols. And even if that’s not sufficient (like in Lukashenko’s case), they can just declare any result they want and beat/jail anyone who disagrees.
I think western commentators on Russian elections/popular opinions just can’t wrap their heads around how corrupt the system is.
Most people in Russia aren’t pro-Putin. They’re indifferent, don’t think about these things much and mind their own business.
These people are actually your allies and a very valuable resource (intellectual, economic, political). Some of them risked their lives supporting opposition, cried for sanctions for years while your politicians benefitted from the regime's corruption and you did nothing. And now you're persecuting them like they're accomplices.
People in the West who live in (relatively) democratic countries just go around saying "Russians elected him" without actually understanding what living under an autocratic rule is like. Putin never won a free and fair election. He persecuted his opponents, denied them access to media (and as of today, there's no independent media left) installed dummy ones that play into his hand and falsified the elections.
It's like seeing hunger in a 3rd world country and saying "why don't they just learn how to program and get an actual job?"
I'm not a fan of Putin's policies here, but inside Russia it's certainly not oppressive in the linguistic sense. If you agree on the unity of the state (don't want actual political independence), you're free to use your language.
Btw, Pavlov's House defence is mentioned in the article and there's a corresponding mission in CoD.
I think Putin's understanding of a "Nazi" is deeply connected to the Russian trauma of WWII that the West still doesn't get. Russians believe that due to the sheer number of lives lost, the USSR (and so Russia as its successor state) played _the_ central role in WWII. I encourage you to watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwKPFT-RioU (the relevant parts start at about 4:40 and 9:40)
I personally think that it makes no sense to talk about "who made the victory" because it was an allied effort and none of the allies could have done it alone. But at the same time, I think that westerners just don't get how personal and traumatic this was for the people of Russia.
So, Putin is very sensitive to any view on WWII that differs from his. Things like "this was just two dictators (Stalin and Hitler) fighting". Or the view of some Ukrainian nationalists that the communists and the nazis were just both occupants (same view exists in Poland), or even that the nazis were liberators from communism. There's history of collaborationism in the Ukraine, as is everywhere, but not everywhere the collaborationists are viewed by a lot of people as national heroes, not as traitors who joined the aggressor (the nazis). I personally understand why this view exists, but for Putin and most Russians it's just outrageous.
So, for Putin a nazi is mostly someone who disagrees with the Russian view on the role of the USSR in WWII. That includes nationalists from countries that Putin views as satellites/buffers (ex-USSR and socialist block), but Western countries that don't get how it looks from the Russian side, even those that were allies in WWII, are also tinted with this "nazi" color.
It's not rock-solid that this is going to happen for the whole body soon, but some truly breakthrough things are happening right now in this field, nothing like the previous decades.
if __name__ == "__main__": some random code
at the end of module files? Never seen that, why is it used? I understand that it's a guard that only runs when the module is executed directly, but what is the code put there? For developers to quickly visually test stuff by running the module?Here, for example https://github.com/willmcgugan/rich/blob/master/rich/color.p...
My friend has an older model that he uses every day for like 4 years, the battery is still reasonably good. And after that, you can still replace the battery and they'll be good as new.
So I opted for over-ear Sony and never looked back. The considerable investment (about 130% of top AirPod model in my country) is totally worth it in my opinion. My wife's AirPods became unusable for a single 1-hour call after about a year.