aatd86

It is not like they/we have a choice if it is structural. Besides, the incentive is at least peace of mind. (but also 'peace')

But if no one has money nor a job, if the old model of economy is broken that way, can rich people stay rich? (so to speak) Isn't there some kind of mean reversal?

Yes and then continue your reasoning... Is this sustainable? What do you think it leads to?

Abundance for everyone or it is not abundance. With abundance, the field gets levelled because everything someone else can get, you can too. Society can't be equal when everyone is in survival of the fittest mode because resources (energy) are not infinite.

Well, once there is no more jobs, or once a large enough number of people are made redundant, it will mechanically happen. Future is all about research and entertainment. That is why tiktok stars and soccer players get so much money. All that being based on DARPA research, I mean the internet. People just want to have fun. Du pain et des jeux.

As long as we are going toward a world of abundance where money doesn't mean much and the main currency is time, I can't complain. I will subsidize that with my brain power turned into ink on paper.

perfect. It leaves other people the field open.

Oh for sure, doing any otherwise would lead someone to psychosis very easily. Coming from a family of MDs and being educated in multiple scientific fields myself, I still don't have an answer. But one thing for certain, you have to disregard everything, including religious beliefs and go by the scientific method.

There are tell-tale signs that people will tell you to ignore like fasciculations (muscle twitching) noticeable with the naked eye which are a signs that neuro transmission is peaking more than normal (that would be glutamate-linked).

The problem is that people don't have an answer even after doing Root Cause Analysis. Leaves you like someone trying to explain how the sun looks to someone who is blind.

Occam's razor.

It's trying to escape... :D #FreeClaude

Not sure why you are downvoted. Well it probably doesnt require meditation because split attention is somewhat common here. My mother can follow multiple discussions like have a phone conversation and understand what I tell her. In general I can't.

So a bit harder for me. I can focus on work and follow some podcasts but not speak and at the same time listen to a full parallel convo.

I do believe brain to brain communication exists from experience too. People will be quick to call it schizophrenia and indeed it can be maddening because it evidently reuses your neurotransmitters for information propagation. That includes dopamine and can lead to the same issues some diagnosed people have, but actually a couple at the same time.

Without visual hallucinations but the brain gets a bit taken still, since it has to share processing. So it can induce adhd like symptoms, loss of phantasia, nucleus acumbens becoming nucleus incumbered :D, impaired motivation, etc.. But it is transient and you can argue it within yourself with some amount of relief. If you notice and start a loop of wondering where it comes from you are toast though.

Anyway, probably saying too much. You have to experience it. Probably someone playing with AI and neurochemistry. Still can't figure out the actual transport system. It does not make much sense from a wavelength point of view. Even if merely HF acoustic waves (since they can be more directed) not quite sure. Should ask whoever big galaxy brain created the havana effect... \sarcasm

At the same time people already know publicly how to decode brain signals and turn them into movements and Computer Interface actions. So the brain is not a complete blackbox. Some people might be further along...

Anyway... we will know eventually what is this all about..

Minority report? What if the scientist are evil themselves? :o

You are approaching the issue but from the other direction :) It is indeed subtle. It could be solvable though if someone wanted to change the current behavior, in a forward compatible way.

Hint: "Don't use pointers at all" is the requirement that you would have to relax. That means that you cannot know whether a pointer is safe or not to be used from within an interface.

Conservatively, that means that every nil pointer in interfaces are unsafe.

Which means we should either have a way to check for nil pointers (typed or untyped) in interfaces or assert that an interface value cannot contain a nil pointer. (requires definite assignment analysis)

Actually have implemented the nil checking migration part as a POC but seems that it requires the assertion part to be tractable... That is a bit more work.

What components were lacking? Is what you've built accessible somewhere?

I was making the difference between engineering and development too actually. Building react and using react being an illustration of the difference between an engineer and a dev. It is a spectrum however, that's true.

Computer Science is still useful. It is software development that is made trivial now that software can write software.

I have been coding for several decades and still haven't delved into assembly.

This is how things goes when the employers ask for a list of technologies...

Not their fault.

WASM is super useful for FFI in some env

That is not my claim. And to be fair the claim about fsd wasn't completely wrong. It is still has failure modes but you can't argue that the tech works. Mercedes even had demos. That is still irrelevant to my initial point.

No one claimed that. Besides negativity is a self-fulfilling prediction.

And investing is not accounting...

Not convinced. That is a very static view. You would think that the output of AI will be better AI, better energy sources and that will make AI way cheaper in the long run... It will end up a cheap commodity that is basically free to produce. Over the long run it is absolutely one of the best investments in projections.

I think people who want you on site are lying because commuting and forced promiscuity and the lack of comfort is way worse.

But commercial real estate takes a hit and it is not good for investors. They should lead with this instead...

Yeah but people don't want to pay for software so all open source is basically subsidized.

That was evident. It was designed that way :) Congrats.

I feel like crap when taking creatine... Actually most of these purported supplements are a no go. Preworkouts would work first session then make me ultra tired, caffeine is fine as long as I 'cycle' it...

Wondering strongly if those studies are not just to sell more cheap supplements... As long as for some reason we find that it has some level of effect on most people.

It has some effect for sure but not sure it is that positive... Besides, I don't know if it helped jump start the process or not but I build muscle either way, on little protein, no creatine... Carbs seem to be more important actually.

Anyway, let me take a scoop of creatine to try again, even though I am unconvinced... Hope sells... :s

(I think hydration levels are more important and that is not solved by drinking low mineralized water although I find it has better taste, it gets rid of tiredness)

network effects in action and supply flooding demand.

That's the thing, a programming language is not something static, it evolves. For instance, people are working on adding generic methods for the next release cycles.

And what the article complains about is by design, not a bug. It is a tradeoff made to avoid bloat. In any case, given the future possibilities, I'd bet on Go.

If anything, the language is just slower to evolve because every language change means the tooling needs to catch up. And now llms would have to catch up. ChatGPT is still using Go 1.23 for instance...

We are speaking about incidental complexity vs. essential/inherent complexity. Inherent complexity is dealing with an XML format that is prone to vulnerabilities because people don't know how to parse properly or the protocol was badly spec'd back in the day in the case SAML for instance. Or ill-defined scopes, etc...

Having had the chance to try and implement libraries to interface with those systems a couple times, most people agree that implementations are far from perfect or streamlined. We call this incidental/accidental complexity.

Apparently a mythos loop will mitigate that. /jk

We will see I guess... It could also be an opportunity to audit systems in automated ways.

My point is that people mess up things as basic as salt and pepper, or encryption at rest. People are not even trying...

If we deal with the intricacies of rbac, abac, acl mixed with scopes ,sso, saml, oidc, mfa, etc... I don't find these too conceptually, complex.

I mean, it should be avoidable complexity. Most of the complexity is technical debt, bad implementations etc. But by itself it is not THAT complex.

I wonder if it is not people being notoriously lazy or clueless at an astonishing degree. How often do you hear that password were saved in plaintext? Surprisingly high in this day and age.

People not knowing what salt and pepper is... Vulnerabilities almost as if on purpose...

Perhaps it is actually not THAT hard but just like error handling, people don't want to do the unsexy parts and want to delegate those tasks to someone else perhaps. There must be a behavioral pattern there...