schmudde

In the Berry style, I can say that I don't need to use AI because my wife can do all the statistical inference I need.

> OpenThropic IPOs, vocal shareholders from Ferenginar quite insistently ask where they money at, token prices go up singificantly: Only a problem if you’re dependent on AI.

Exactly. People are going to be surprised when they can't afford to maintain their own code.

I actually agree with Collison - although I have to admit I never thought about Brothers K so deeply. It never engendered that response from me.

The Idiot is my favorite Dostoyevsky novel. The Prince's good nature were also his flaws. This leads to so many profound scenes and scenarios. And it gives greater texture to Christian philosophy and the image of Christ than any other analysis I have ever read.

"The House of the Dead" changed the way I looked at prisons, "Crime and Punishment" about ego and justice, "Notes From Underground" about the lone genius - I can't say that Brothers K. gave me any of this.

> Closer to reality, I can’t experiment with cooking without understanding the underlying chemistry. Generally speaking, I can’t use something I don’t understand completely – if it doesn’t click, I can’t work with it.

But there is always more detail to learn?

The article only mentions tuition once - which is the original sin of US universities.

I have generally found that US Americans don't really understand the incredible value that these institutions bring to the overall culture and economy. Thus the broader population has a will to critique but no will to improve the situation.

The pace at which sports betting has changed in the USA is incredible. I grew up with Pete Rose not getting into the baseball hall of fame. Not it's impossible to imagine that athletes are not betting on games. And more importantly, there is the social cost:

"One UCLA study published earlier this year found that in states that legalized sports gambling online, bankruptcies and credit card delinquencies increased about 25%. A survey by the National Council on Problem Gambling found 8% of American adults, almost 20 million people, reported experiencing at least one indicator of problematic gambling behavior "many times" in the past year. "

"The Annotated Turing" - I didn't know you could meaningfully intertwine biography and technical analysis like that.

I've always had more projects than I do time. And it's easy for me to be selective about where I might use an LLM. So no changes here.

> In June 2003, Europe’s data-protection authorities formally advised ICANN that individuals should be able to register domains without their details on a public register, drawing the line between natural persons, whom the law protects, and legal persons, whom it does not, even back then. Nothing structurally changed in the following fifteen years while the ICANN community argued endlessly about WHOIS.

Losing meaningful WHOIS is a problem. I can't believe we cannot find a reasonable middle ground between privacy for individuals and transparency for organizations.

Been getting into Rudy Rucker, who was funded by the AutoCAD folks to do cellular automata research: https://www.fourmilab.ch/cellab/.

Autodesk funded some really interesting projects.

Trevor Paglen had a similar project for US military SIGINT. It's interesting how much more "serious" the Russian insignias are than the US patches. I have a few pictures here: https://schmud.de/books/i-could-tell-you-but-then.html

The web browser app paradigm changed everything. The Windows API isn't nearly as important as it once was.

I don't understand why this would be different than the Microsoft Office/LibreOffice situation. Adoption has been really slow in Europe (though it is happening - to the credit of European bureaucracies) even though the software packages essentially have feature parity.

This is also what landed with me.

The issues we experiment with are usually quite broad - improvements to logging, routing - but the implementation is always more narrow. Still, it seems like there is still more room for more refinement and focus now that you mention it.

Yeah - we're doing something like one-on-ones that drive these explorations. Maybe we need to make the "20%" more formal.

The real missing part is discussed in the "knowledge building" link. I'm on board with Peter Naur's idea of building software, but it's very difficult to share individual knowledge with a team as it is being formed.

For example, reading someone's implementation as a work in progress is a different than reading an implementation that is a complete idea.

A work in progress is a lot easier to read with a design document in hand, but that design document that is full of assumptions that might be better explored in short feedback loops on production.