15% faster on top of a base interpreter that itself got 40%-50% faster on the same timeframe.
6,610 karma · joined June 17, 2020
To be fair, the apparent lack of progress of the JIT before was in part due to the same team improving the base interpreter by 40-50% between 3.10 and 3.14. The JIT implementation was pursuing a moving target. It was not some static milestone. Kudos for them.
I didn't notice the current PEP was a provisional one. Hope the new one gets approved. The experimental JIT was reported to finally breaking even and surpassing the default interpreter just a couple of months ago[1].
[1] https://fidget-spinner.github.io/posts/jit-on-track.html
Source? In a growing market, one can spread their investiments to get safe returns that approach the overall economic growth. In a shrinking market, the same logic should lead to small losses, year over years, making investiment much riskier and unactrative. Markets are made of people.
> The pigeon migrated in enormous flocks, constantly searching for food, shelter, and breeding grounds, and was once the most abundant bird in North America, numbering around 3 billion, and possibly up to 5 billion.
Past performance is not indicative of future results.
Soon we will discover. I suspect the answer will be no, at least not for long. Markets are made of people. Can the economy grow despite a shrinking market losing economies of scale everywhere? I hope, but I don't count on it.
And this was in a developed country well resourced to take the hit.
We have billionaries and LLCs, supervillains whose superpowers are based on being rich, don't worrying about the future much beyond the next quarter, and pretending personhood to hold rights like people, but without the possibility of getting arrested.
If well managed I think this is possible. But it's not given. Another scenario is houses in the countryside, small towns and far suburbs getting empty and soon uninhabitable due to lack of maintenance/infrastructure degradation, and remaining people packing close to core areas that remain high cost.
Usually disappeared. Once DNA tests were invented, it became straighforward to go after them. Underrated breakthrough to support children and single mothers.
Men's too, from 40s up. Not as severe, and not cliff-like in the end like menopause. But it compounds, as the typical couple ages are directly correlated.
The part that makes no sense for me is men ending with smaller rates of dementia, given they had much less estrogen to begin with. Men have less incidence of dementia. Men also have much lager incidence of baldness. Did somebody already study if baldness and dementia are inversely correlated? I don't know, perhaps sunlight exposure in the scalp have neuroprotective effects?
Given the prevalence of baldness, and the downside of the condition for sexual attractiveness of its bearers, I suspect we will still discover some strong unexpected upside to explain why this trait was selected for regardless.
It's because of this Big Tech is busy undermining the basis of democracy, isolating people in bubbles, poisoning political discourse with slop and pimping would be autocrats. They want to strip political power from common citizens, turning toward sefdom.
For context, by 1975 Brazil was still aproximately halfway under the brutal military dictatorship that started in 1964, through a military coup supported by Operation Brother Sam[1], and ended only in the late 80s. The movie "The Secret Agent", Oscar nominated in the 2026 ceremony, unfolds in 1977, roughly the same timeframe. It would be a very interesting topic for historical research to comb national files from that period to see if the military surveiled or acted against the named researchers, in some form, for those first attempts to conect to the proto-internet.
Unions were the institutions that actually helped employees. It's a shame they had their reputations smeared and many were busted, leaving workers out in the cold. The worst run union probably does more for employees than the best HR department.
I don't think USSR poverty rates surpassed those of Tsarist Russia that preceded them. To their credit, I think ideologic competition between capitalist and communist blocks was part of what allowed improvement of life conditions of workers in capitalist countries, after WWII. Fear of revolutions avoided one-percenters taking all productivity gains in the period. They had to share some to keep guillotines away. As soon as things went south in the USSR, from the 70s onwards, and capitalism took over the whole world, lacking any sort of viable extant competition, we reverted back to the old norm, the workers were denied their share of the productivity gains since then, and here are us now. A regime premised on free competition was undermined by lack of competition to itself.
[1] https://locusmag.com/feature/cory-doctorow-full-employment/