HackerLangs
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

adwn

6,035 karmajoined 13 lat temu

comments

adwn
·przedwczoraj·discuss
Those systems you're alluding to received ungodly amounts of work and resources, vastly more than most projects can ever hope for, and yet they're still full of holes and security exploits. You're unwittingly making a great argument against using C, C++ – or Zig.
adwn
·przedwczoraj·discuss
Are you sure about "rms types" specifically? Stallman is very ineffective in his proselytization, owing to his complete refusal of any kind of compromise or concession to dissenting positions. This stance may keep your soul pure and righteous, but it won't bring you one millimeter closer to your objectives.
adwn
·5 dni temu·discuss
The human brain hasn't solved NP-hardness, either. We make it work using heuristics and automation tools, which in turn use heuristics themselves. I see no reason why AI wouldn't be able to take the same approach.
adwn
·17 dni temu·discuss
Solving the halting problem is neither necessary nor sufficient to prevent DoS attacks.

It isn't necessary, because settings timeouts or other resource restrictions works way better to prevent DoS.

It isn't sufficient, because even if you can prove that a program will halt at some point, this alone doesn't tell you how long it will take. What good does it do to know that the program will run for 10 years before it halts? By that time, service will already have been denied. Even turning hash table lookups from O(1) to O(n) (still very much terminating!) can result in a DoS.
adwn
·w zeszłym miesiącu·discuss
> Hardware isn’t where the margins are

Baseless speculation

> probably is somewhat of a loss leader for small-batch users

Wrong. AMD/Xilinx doesn't sell devices directly to customers, they sell them to distributors in huge quantities. Those distributors then sell them to "small-batch users", and they're not involved with AMD/Xilinx free-tier software at all.

> they’re running at around -10% profit on small sales to try and drive subscription revenue multipliers

More baseless speculation
adwn
·2 miesiące temu·discuss
> […] that violates universal causality

I think you're conflating qualia with free will. These are very different concepts, and the experience of qualia has nothing at all to do with "violating causality".

> So there should be no reason we cannot reduce these phenomena to actual quantifiable and there for Computable elements.

As long as we have practically no idea how qualia arise, or even what exactly they are, your claim has no base to stand on.
adwn
·2 miesiące temu·discuss
No, there is at least one other option, which is that consciousness [1] is a phenomenon that we can't replicate in non-biological brains [2], but from which the existence of a "God"-like being, as the term is understood by major religions, still doesn't follow.

[1] Or "qualia", to be precise.

[2] For example, the existence of qualia might require certain carbon-based structures which aren't present in silicon-based devices.
adwn
·3 miesiące temu·discuss
I thought we were way past the "bigger brain means more intelligence" stage of neuroscience?
adwn
·3 miesiące temu·discuss
And yet another "AI doesn't work" comment without any meaningful information. What were your exact prompts? What was the output?

This is like a user of conventional software complaining that "it crashes", without a single bit of detail, like what they did before the crash, if there was any error message, whether the program froze or completely disappeared, etc.
adwn
·3 miesiące temu·discuss
> We could probably slash gas prices by banning oil exports, thus removing domestic oil supply from global market pricing (barring smuggling).

To my understanding, you couldn't do this, no. The US is a net oil exporter, but many of its refineries are tuned for processing oil with a chemical composition that isn't found in the US, or not found in sufficient quantity. So the US has to both import and export oil, it can't just replace imports with exports.
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
> ironically because he thought it would avoid making him look weak and incompetent

Trump is what a weak man imagines a strong man to be like. Just look at his official portrait [1], trying to look tough and dangerous. Compare that to Dwight D. Eisenhower's portrait [2], a man who commanded entire armies in the largest war in human history.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#/media/File:Offic...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower#/media/Fi...
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
Oil is a globally priced commodity. This means that downstream consumers of oil in the US will be just as affected by rising prices as European consumers. US producers of oil will benefit, though.
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
> it forced US to spend huge amounts of money and military hardware which the EU simply didn't have

- Europe's monetary aid for Ukraine far outweighs that of the US.

- The US military aid for Ukraine mostly consisted of old and obsolete hardware.

- Since about a year or so, all weapons and munitions delivered by the US are paid for by Europe.
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
> Since WWII […]

Europe didn't slack off militarily during the Cold War. Germany, for example, poured massive amounts of money and resources into the Bundeswehr to be able to fend of the Soviets. The US relied as much on the European members of NATO as the Europeans did on the US.

After the Cold War, both the US and Europe scaled back their military spending and enjoyed the peace dividend. It was only after 2001 that the US increased its budget again – but to fight insurrectionist wars (which EU members aren't particularly interested in), not in a peer conflict. They're not prepared for a pro-longed war against a near-peer power.

So although I agree that Europe should be rearming heavily, and should have started in 2022 at the very latest, it's not like the US did really much better. They're really good at curb-stomping much weaker opponents, like Venezuela or Iran, but they haven't seriously prepared for a war against China.
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
> So why is the argument "write more code"?

It isn't, that's what you injected. The argument was "write [the same amount of] code faster". And that is undoubtedly a good thing, because execution speed can make or break your startup.
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
> But for startups, side-hustles, VC-pitches and the inner-workings of companies and so on (HN crowd) coding was never the problem.

I'd say you're 180° wrong. Getting to an MVP fast is the most immediate problem when you've started a startup. Iterating on ideas fast is the most immediate problem once you've released your MVP. You need an MVP to get users, and you need to to iterate to find product-market fit. Perfectly crafted code is a luxury problem you can't afford in the early stages.
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
Tell them to use the Composer 1.5 model. It's really good, better than Sonnet, and has much higher usage limits. I use it for almost all of my daily work, don't have to worry about hitting the limit of my 60$ plan, and only occasionally switch to Opus 4.6 for planning a particularly complex task.
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
Thanks for the correction. I wasn't aware of this, but it makes sense now that you mention it.
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
"Expensive and painful body modifications"? Like, what, earrings? What a sacrifice.
adwn
·4 miesiące temu·discuss
> One could argue that LLMs learning programming languages made for humans (i.e. most of them) is using the wrong interface as well.

Then go ahead and make an argument. "Why not do X?" is not an argument, it's a suggestion.