Speaking of non-political side of him: was not he wrong about "innate grammar" necessary to understand langage? LLM do not have such circuitry, yet they somehow work well...
It does not have to be bestselling books; just some niche books. And also I can guarantee you I can write you a book, say, "intro in datascience" without actually knowing much about the subject, just by mixing together existing material; after that succesfully forget everything I had learned why was writing the book.
I have frankly dealt with some people, who wrote books, had lots of titles, yet were incompenent in the very subject their books are about. So yeah, does not mean much to me. I personally love whiteboard tests; shows your ability to code quickly and reliably.
The worst intel did is fusing off AVX512 in Alder Lake. It is the _ONLY_ consumer grade CPU family with hardware AVX512 FP16 support. Fantastic instruction set for machine learning.
I live in a developing country. We stopped buying cakes/pastries long time ago, as they have become way too expensive for the quality. Home baked stuff is like 1/3 price for better quality.
Nothing bets a hardrive wrapped in a blanket, in case you accidentally hit or drop the bag you put it in. This is how we did in my university, in late 1990s.
nah tor is not trustworthy, as it also exposes you as a tor user; in a less developed countries, where not many people know how to use Tor, you'll stick out real bad. It is much better to use shady random proxy servers you'll find online, before connecting to Tor; it is extremely slow, but much safer, as the authoritarian state monitors won't be able to see that subpoenaed ip adresses come from tor exit nodes, conveniently at the same time period you (and basically no one else) were using Tor.
Yet another catchphrase made by someone who lived through Lisp's heyday. There is not much "magic" in Common Lisp, aside from homoiconicity; it is dated old language, which reeks the smell of 1970s and 1980s in every corner of it. Yes it still fun to play with even today, but it is not some magic unicorn everything evolves into eventually.
USA's FDA is notorious for not finding therapeutical effect in plant medicines. The same plants which have been in use for 100s years in ex-USSR and Germany. USSR's pharma was relatively prudent and would not peddle non-working solutions for New Age reasons.
You should probably reread what I wrote, and lay off your patronizing attitutde. "It is just better, you do not get it" won't work here. Yes you can do functional in Lisp, as you can do it in even in C, but why? The support for functional style is laughable, compared to Haskell or even Clojure. CL advocates are fanatically fail to accept bitter truth: CL is dead language with once great set of features which now present in many many other languages.
What kind of "freedom", precisely, are you talking about? Freedom to write purely functional programs? Well, then you need Haskell or Clojure at least. Freedom to write small, self sufficient binaries? Well you need C or C++ then.
CL is a regular multiparadigm language with a rich macro system, relatively good performance but nonexistent dependency management, too unorthodox OOP, with no obvious benefits compared to more modern counterparts, and a single usable implementation (SBCL). If I want s-expressions based language I can always choose Scheme or Clojure, if I need modern flexible multiparadigm language I'd use Scala
Actually this is precisely same cadence as in good old C. As someone who writes lots of low-level code, I find Go's cadence very familiar and better than try-catch.