663 karma · joined February 11, 2022
At least STEM subjects are tested against repeatable natural phenomena or mathematic validation.
A CPU is indifferent to you complexifying yourself, ad infinitum. It didn't have to be like that.
You can see it on youtube for channels to be setup on a sole concept and then the creator drives it home forever.
Opinions are not based on knowledge or certainty.. they're opinions.
I miss when opinions were a thing you said to get the 'nothing' out and a probative suggestion that started conversations.
Locking opinion down to knowledge and certainty is essentially non-sensical in English.
The old saying was 'opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one'. Perfectly encapsulates how serious opinions are.... not at all serious, by design.
Conversations (on the surface level) have become narrow.
It's the pursuit to reveal a very specific meaning, and the connections around it. It won't go anywhere.. people will want freedom from it.
The culmulative effect of Jordan's lectures fits too neatly into the Screwtape Letters.
Lots of 'cure' mentions while admitting the treatment is not a cure. Trials run with ambigious results, and Excision is protecting the data until 2024.
Honestly not sure if I read an article at all. It reads like a 'keep alive' ping from an old space probe reporting back it's still alive status.
Most new technologies that blossom out to startups should be done in a university-like environment. I mean having knowledge on hand, similar staff members to mull ideas over, stable income and away from 'wfh'.
Doing all that from random locations, with the added stress of market-fit, marketing, taxes, ect is a headache.
Simply navigating the minefield of public tech and business knowledge without stupifying yourself and falling for inauthentic lies, is a danger.
It's going well though, wanted to point out those dangers for those playing along.
So some talented artists are pushing the bounds and wrestling with performance trade-offs in the fragment shader.
Fragment shaders are more commonly used for making full screen filter effects (color correction, ect).
Shaders are also used to make textures and materials on basic objects. Material artists often generate textures with shader math.
Many visual effects are made by using shaders in creative ways.
Shaders are run on the GPU in a parallel, wave-like fashion. Many, many, many threads run across the same data in one wave.
In some cases shaders are much faster than CPU branching code. Shaders also have easier access to some rendering data.
So they are a good space for creative special effects.
Any object in a game with a high level of surface detail is a common target, to shift that detail onto a shader.
Ocean surfaces, tesselating meshes, ect.
There's many other uses, because GPUs are powerful and flexible.
An earthquake on Mars very quickly becomes the local Martian government's problem when it is insanely expensive to fix.. and the vocab would follow..
I'm sure this time is the time. Boy who cried wolf and all that..
The FCC bleeping regulation doesn't really interest me, it's mild irritant in media..
It's slowly becoming obvious to me that the English-speaking cultures (UK, US, AUS, CAN, ect) are sculpted to interpret the same content in their own cultural view and it all somehow works even though we're constantly talking past/parrallel to each other.
Watching an American historian's reaction to philomena cunk peice, showed me how much he enjoys the literal-ness of her straight faced jokes, the same jokes I see as boldly satirical comments made for chuckles. And it somehow works for both cultures.
With that in mind, communicating anything worthwhile over internet comments is obviously orders of magnitude harder because of the cultural barriers. And the cracks between worldviews run deep.. and are starting to show.. I don't really know how to comment to other cultures accurately anymore.
There's no stakes here (the internet) for it to matter if you swear or not.
Your attitude on the internet won't result in any meaningful feedback, by default.
Someone has to be watching from a more strict environment for it to matter what you say on the internet. It needs to affect your job, or your wife needs to read your posts, or a moderator needs to clamp down on you.
The community accepts swearing by default.
Soo people who are in professional environments are going to bring their communication norms with them when they post online.
An I over -explaining an answer to a rhetorical 'why?' question. I think I am.
I can never tell online, if people are literally asking a question that requires explaining OR it is simply a rhetorical question.
Oh well. c'est la vie.
Obtaining power at any cost requires the internal director to pretend he doesn't know, what he's doing.
The vast majority of social capital is made by lying to people, pretending to not know you've done it and dropping relationships with anybody who is not pulling in your direction.
Silence is vastly underrated, I say ironically, so I shouldn't be typing this out.
The effect of the swear is doubled in a professional environment, when delivered the right way.
I'm sure you already get the concept of a typo and in effect only added your judgement of my comment in the form of a question, to the thread.
Thanks, but no thanks.
Hackernews (generally) is increasingly becoming that old philosophical trope: the unbearable truth must be shown to be false.
No telling the populace whom sits in the high chair, dictating the code that runs their lives. Could be anyone, including a foreign governemnt.
It used to be middle management owned the message it was delivering you, and your conscience could choose to oppose them.
Now electronics owns every man, woman and child in the UK. Given the obvious biometric future. And you can't negotiate or disagree with electronics.
Brexit'd yourself into a corner and then locked it down biometrically.
There are too many artificial constrictions, forcing businesses to be hobbled to the slowest performer.
Ditch the labour requirement and half the world's economy can be automated from dawn to dusk.
Good conscience is wasted on business.
You can't say no to electronics. The cat behind the curtain could be anybody. A state, a corporation, a theocracy, ect.
Xi Jin Ping (or a Jihadist) could hypothetically set all the electronic rules in the UK and nobody would know the difference.
When a cultural revolution happens behind the electronic curtain, your conscience can't know it, or oppose it.
Severing control of one's behaviour, from the individual conscience and placing it in the hands of electronics.
Brings into existence total cultural control of Britian, without the ability for individuals to oppose it or understand it.
Our world used to run on written agreements and Kantian-esque moral emotions with Duty. None of that matters or has any influence over an electronic life. All that matters is the will, so told by the unseen electronic controllers.
Britian is dead and Britian is not allowed to know it.
The law assigns personal ownership of your data, to control you.
The farcical idea that some law will allow the individual to reverse decades of progress towards electronic identity systems (even for themselves) is a joke.
It's over for the British, the culture won. You cannot oppose cultural movements anymore, because they happen behind a computer screen. Britian is dead.
Specific "tasks" are bounded by their requirements, we've seen none of that in the take-all and leave no stone unturned approach to electronics.
There is a false calm in not taking this seriously enough. The default reaction of many is to avoid hurting feelings, at the cost of western liberty.
Your choice.
At some point, it will be trivial to force people to act against their conscience, en masse, with electronic precision.
Computers don't take no for an answer. They are the horrifying interface to tyranny.
The Catholics used to build churches that took 300yrs to construct, long after the death of the original designer.
It is not difficult to imagine 1950s roads turning into the cyberpunk cities, full of autonomous vehicles.
We take exams at school for basically the same reason.
You have to set up an institution or structured lessons to get the higher levels of cognitive measurement.
A company can use an educated guess for cognitive ability. Usually made up from completed tasks.
Selling features that don't exist is a side-effect of the company culture.
It's easy to observe the business culture in the West is often well divorced from academic truth seeking. As a matter of fact and good business.
The culture won.
The West is a cultural project, and anybody taking knowledge seriously, will be laughed off the planet.
The Fed was running on cheap money for a long time, the pendulum swings the other way eventually..
What did you expect?
Give us literally anything to talk about. A picture of an alarm clock on a store page and a price tag, is going to get discussion about what people like in alarm clocks.
This is how to generate positive discussion about your alarm clock product on HN:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25902165
Has a blog post with an interesting concept. There's something to talk about.
He gets positive feedback, people encourage him to start a kickstarter.
Agolia has examples, literally alarm clocks made by individuals.
Ya'll salty for no reason.
But a feature complete product, with perfect performance cannot be sold twice.
I won't need to buy a PDF reader ever again, now that I have SumatraPDF, for example.
the quality of evidence required, to culturally settle an argument or otherwise allow for positive action, has dropped off a cliff.
evidence my older brother would scoff at, is coming out of trained professionals' mouths.
the justification for big risks on little evidence flows waaay too easily lately.