Micoloth

I’m just some guy that works as a software engineer (i don’t even have a phd) but I’ve always been interested in Type theory.

So, a few years back, i found on youtube the lectures Bob Harper gave at the OPLSS, and watched them all.

It’s been a revelation for me!

It’s truly an experience, and I’ve been a straight up Bob Harper fan ever since. This is how all lectures should be given. The passion he has for these topics is completely evident!

Before, i was vaguely interestes in type theory. Since then, i’ve been really into type theory, and I’ve gotten deeper and deeper into it.

So nice to see this homage to him!

Most sibling comments are already pointing out how sad this idea is, but I’ll add this: apparently you to refuse accept that acceptance can “magically” lead to change. On the other hand, I claim that acceptance (of reality) is the Only way to change! For a (deep down) very simple reason: if you want to change reality, you have to start from reality. This means accepting it. Living in an imagined world leads to no change.

This is (one of) the core ideas of buddhism-related philosophies. I suggest you give those a chance!

>Nothing in life happens without trauma. That’s Not True. If you accept reality and see that some change is Right, you Do it. No trauma. This is a Fact, and again, dealing with facts and accepting what is true is very liberating.

And look man, I’m in a pretty confused situation myself right now, but we all trying to figure out what’s best!

I'm more and more seeing that this is true. Still, it is sad.

The question isn't even, what can one do, because obviously nobody can change how incentives works in a given society.

The question is: is there a timeline in which the right incentives (to share data) start being enforced? How would that play out?

I see what you are saying.. As a counterpoint, to me, an oriented plane in 3d very much remembers a rotation though! The graphical convention of a plane with a circle arrow is great because it makes it very clear.

To see what a plane does to a vector, you take the product: of course you start with basis vectors and then later show that everything composes linearly.

The very important thing here is that the geometric product should Not be taught as the sum of scalar and cross product. Geometric product is defined by rules on the basis vectors and by linearity!

Now, I admit that when you see that making actual rotations is not as straighforward as one would expect, it’s confusing, and a bit disappointing. But, I think one can believe that bivectors are about rotation somehow, and then go further to the more complex exponential thing.

Idk maybe it’s just personal preferences, i studied quite a bit of math at college, but i never studied quaternions, and now I’m just very glad I didn’t, since this is much better to me!

This (beautifully written idea) may be the point, to me.

I Don’t like to work. I Like free time. But i know more than enough people who are just unable to stay still with themselves.

Could it be that society (by emergent behaviour) has actually turned up like this (with basically mandatory work and no free time) to cope with this necessity of most people to not be still?

Russel dismisses the possibility of this being the case, but it doesn’t feel completely far fetched to me.

In that case, it’s bad news for the ones who’d work less, because the ones willing to work more will always have more power- and they’re usually not afraid to use it…

I’ll take advantage of this comment to ask the tangential question: Where can i learn how llvm “compilation” works in Julia?

I know code is only supposed to be JIT’ed and then executed by the runtime (that’s why PackageCompiler exists), but still I’d like to know more about how it works..

Like, if i write a simple pure function in Julia and call code_llvm on it… How “standalone” is the llvm code (if that is even a thing)? When does GC get called? How exactly does the generated code depend on the runtime?

Is there any good explanation of this?

The “ Some safe and some bold predictions” comment is almost exactly my view on how programming should evolve. (functional, reactive, going toward dependent types etc ) Interesting how in 2012 it was already so clear!

I think mostly we do have gone in that direction, even if probably even slower than the (already cautious) commenter predicted.

Honest question: why are we as a community so slow at evolving a good, solid programming environment?

I get that each time a new language is introduced, porting over all the existing code + training the people is an immense task. But this is _exactly the problem_, right?

Why aren’t we able to stop for a while and sort out once and for all a solid framework for coding?

It’s not a theoretical ideal: I’m very convinced that the dumb piling up of technologies/languages/frameworks that we use now is significantly slowing down the _actual daily work_ we do of producing software. Definitely >>50% of my time as a programmer is spent on accidental complexity, that i know for sure.

It’s very practical: at this point this whole thing simply feels like very bad engineering, tbh?

Well yes, any sad, lonely 14 year old would have told you so…

(not that they’d conduct a study, so it’s good to have scientific evidence)

I think parent means a General Purpose language, i.e. capable of computations.

Personally, on one hand I know allowing computations into configuration immediatly destroys any hope of having a tidy, rational schema in real word projects.

On the other hand though, i do believe configuration and code should be build with related tools, possibly the same tool- or at least tools using the same syntax!

(a bit like the json syntax is the same as a Python dict syntax, except this is the terrible example that is so poorly thought out that does more harm than good)

This unlocks a much greater degree of freedom and power than all the gluing together technologies that we have to do...

Actually no, i think it’s great.

You can argue about the UI or why it’s called “people also search for” instead of just “related entities”, but as a feature, for me it greatly enhance the discoverability aspect of browsing Google (and hence the internet), i use it all the time to explore new topics and i’ve at times found really useful info there!

So this is my opinion of course, based on my use case.

Very cool.. Thanks!

I always want to do more things with Wasm and actual demos are the best ways to know how to start

Your Github library looks super interesting as well!

To be fair, I don't agree with this point of view at all.

Things in the physical world break down beacuse they are made of matter, and the entire concept of "working" is a very simplified modeling of their behaviour that doesn't include second-order effects like tear,consumption of materials etc.

Code, on the other hand, is a social constrution but entirely confined in an abstract and mathematical world. The _only_ reason we still don't have a reliable and solid code infrastructure (in the sense explained by the article) is our inability as a community to once and for all define a solid foundation for the principles of computing. Hence all the hacked together languages, tools and frameworks that people have piled on each other over the decades.

If one century of efforts hasn't been enough, fine. But we absolutely can work towards that goal.

Just commenting to say how awesome arxiv-vanity is. I didn’t know it existed, but I’ve wanted it to exist for years! Thanks!

It isn’t able to render all the papers i tried but still very useful.

Add a dark theme to it and I’ll be forever happy!

I absolutely do find infuriating when math is written down vaguely/confusingly/poorly, and ML papers are a great example of this happening way too often.

BUT, for your specific examples (in case that is an actual question):

The first one can be parsed using the fact that y_i in the second term wouldn't make sense if it was outside the summation, since the i index is only defined inside

The second (and actually, the first one, too) uses the very well established convention that multiplication always has precedence over summation, in every kind of expression. So the 2 multiplies the second sigma, and then the product is summed to the first sigma. This rule should make a lot of cases much clearer.

I agree, exacyly. Unfortunately, having such an ideal commute is basically impossible for most people, who are left with the other two options, both of them worse. Alternate between commute and wfh is better but just not as good.

I really feel like an ideal commute is one of the ultimate luxuries, given how much impact it has on daily life. Even better than 20 mins by car is 20 mins by bike/ on foot.

I guess at the end of the day they are Germans lol

I don’t know what country you are from, in my country laughing is never a thing people are supposed to not do.

On the other hand, since it was always very not natural for me, i’ve used this strategy (basically laughing on command- that is, actually, fake laughing) for many of my teenage years, and it has taken several years and much thought for me to realize that it was making me really miserable.

Now i tend more towards not forcing myself to do anything that wouldn’t be natural from me, and this has made me much more satisfied with myself (even if, sure, simply growing up would have that effect anyway..)

If what you are actually saying is you are naturally wired to laugh a lot and you were actually restraining yourself, well then sure, but then also i’m sure you never had much soft skills problems...

Absolutely relatable!

> Too many googleable questions

To be fair (as one who hasn't paid too much attention to these developements in the last few months/years), the sheer amount of individual facts that are apparently encoded in a fixed nn architecture is what amazes me the most here?

I get that it has 175B variables, but it's not like you can used them in a structured way to store say a knowledge base...

WHY

Wait what? I kinda saw it coming with XR.. It’s still bad tho.

3D touch is an _amazing_ feature for power users, and one of the few that markedly differentiated the iphones from competition. Biggest thing is text editing of course, where 3D selection increases productivity _several times_, but potential was even greater if implemented more.

Ironic that they are marketing this one as pro.

I bought a X recently and plan on keeping it for years. If they software disable it with an OS update or some BS i’m gonna be so mad.

Also, I feel kinda stupid saying it but I feel like this is the sort of thing steve Jobs would have pushed harder for

I wanted to ask the same question: how does it compare to Dash?

As a non-javascript user who does data visualization, I would love to have some advice about which technology(es) to invest time into

Man this was brilliant!

I was laughing, but i got ptsd'd hard lol.

I mean, you would not believe how _actually similar to this_ the websites of several, massive, especially state-run companies in my country are

Oh man yes!

The fact that he doesn’t make videos anymore is such a bummer!

If HN is confused, imagine the people out there

The other answers are right, but the best part is- that was literally hacking lol

Yes, that’s nice! I’ve never done this, and maybe i don’t know enough songs to do it right..

It would be great if you shared your playlists in any way!

Couldn't they (Microsoft) fork it if requests got rejected?

But, isn't it reasonable to assume that microsoft will get hold of the Whole codebase if they embrace this as their new default browser? I mean its Microsoft we're talking about..

For what reason (if any)?