creata

> Not to sound snarky but why don't you go outside and meet people, exercise, play sports, explore nature?

For many people it's shame. Feeling like you're mentally a child while everyone around you is an adult can't be a good feeling.

They've already "checked out" in reality (NEETs, etc.) but they're still "lowest on the totem pole". The people who feel superior to them seem content to do so from afar, to belittle them from the comfort of social media.

> Whoever is in charge could try to drag those people back into the real world by force

But why would you even want that? They like it in the simulation, and nobody really wants to deal with them outside the simulation.

> Why is cooking enjoyable?

Maybe it's about the joy of learning something new every time you cook. Having Michelin star restaurants in your neighborhood would add to that joy, not take away from it.

> I would like to believe that many people will still choose reality and real relationships.

Why would you like to believe that?

> what GenZ is doing these days is professional complaining

We are watching machines rapidly match and surpass humans at countless skills that were considered uniquely human mere months ago - skills that demanded a lot of creativity and insight. Some of our oldest fields of study (e.g., mathematics) are turning into a game of who can spend the most tokens.

I think the humans are entitled to complain a little.

> And we know why. It's because of their hostile attitude towards their users.

Right, their decline is because of the thing that they've been accused of since the very beginning, and not the trillion-dollar technology that replaces them. Brilliant take.

> has started to just feel more akin to a religious stance than something based on any specific fact

It can be an ethical stance based on facts, rather than religious-like. AI has no shortage of ethical issues that could stop someone from using it.

Comparing these people to religious or MAGA types - who believe in things that are false or at least unprovable - is farcical.

How would you make it better UX-wise? I can't imagine it being much better. It just gets out of your way.

One reason IRV is popular is that it has extensive use in other countries (Australia, Ireland). It's not revolutionary but it's an improvement and nothing terrible has happened.

STAR has been used approximately nowhere. STAR is also one of the few seriously advocated-for voting methods in which it's possible for the first choice of a majority to lose, although that isn't likely to happen in practice.

We already have plenty of great languages for those use cases.

I don't want syntax conveniences, I want fewer footguns. C has so many ways to trip you up that aren't inherent to its domain. Are any of these new languages better in that regard?

His reasoning:

https://danluu.com/slow-device#appendix-this-site-vs-sites-t...

https://twitter.com/danluu/status/1115707741102727168

It's probably possible to prompt an LLM into writing well, but most LLM writing that I've seen is poorly structured (e.g., the paragraphs in this post feel like strings of punchy marketing phrases), and the LLMs are too good at sounding like they're saying a lot while saying very little.

Plus, if a human puts the effort into writing something, that signals to me that it's worth something, because human time is much more scarce than LLM time.

I don't know if it's applicable here, but Wasm programs can access multiple memories.

No, it doesn't.

If it wasn't PDF it'd be something else. It's everything after the PDF that's alarming here - how did they break out of the app sandbox?

Is it irresponsible? They've revealed barely anything about how it works, besides that the first step is a PDF, and something about Glyph Grift.

This seems more correlated with big vs. small organizations, not closed vs. open organizations. There are open projects (e.g., Debian, Blender) that tick all four of your boxes in my opinion.

This. The only mainstream alternative is Android, and I'm already "voting with my wallet" against Samsung, Google, and the rest for violating user privacy even more than Apple does.

> Tokio's not a lightweight thread/green thread system

It's not green threads (and maybe not lightweight threads; there are so many names for things that may or may not be considered the same...) in the sense of stackful coroutines, but either way, it's a userspace implementation of multitasking on top of a smaller number of OS threads, which is the part that's relevant to my question.

Sorry, when you said "People are beginning to realise what AI can do for them.", I got the impression you were referring to the general public lessening their visceral hatred of anything AI-generated, not niche groups of people doing very impressive things.

No, I mean that Tokio, Go, etc., were built with general-purpose web servers in mind, and they decided that lightweight threads were necessary for that purpose because OS threads had too much overhead to be used per-request.

NGINX uses a state machine per task, which as far as I know is kind of what Rust's async functions end up desugaring to.

Where does this advice come from? Most web servers would use a lot more resources if they didn't use userland threading, wouldn't they?

It's hard to say that all the (to varying degrees) vibecoded security vulnerabilities posted to the frontpage are pointless.

> There's a new vibecoded project shown off here almost every day.

Every other post on the News.YC frontpage has been about AI for the past few years. That means very little.

> YouTube has gotten a lot more entertainment rising above the slop.

Examples would be great. I'm looking on YouTube's "hot" playlists and haven't yet seen anything marked AI, although that of course doesn't rule out the use of AI.

I don't think it'd have to imply a soul - one of these "functionally simple units" is much less well-understood than the other, and you can insert whatever belief you want to fill the gaps.

> scientific research has always had areas where the most advanced tools were beyond the reach of every scientist who might like to have access.

What's different this time is that this situation is expanding to almost every field.

> what you don't find compelling about the article's example, beyond the fact that you can identify a reason for the error to occur.

It's not just that there's a reason for the error to occur, it's that (1) the line between what the borrow checker can and can't do is currently clear, even if it's privileging references and boxes, and (2) the fix is a one-line change. Exposing more language hook points via traits to save one line here and there is what doesn't seem compelling to me, which is why I asked for an example where it leads to a more significant improvement in the code.

Like, the mentioned roadmap page says "But Option<&mut T> or custom smart pointers require awkward .as_deref_mut() or .reborrow() calls"; what I'm asking is: how awkward?

> That works, but it's not particularly intuitive.

It looks fine? The code fails because it dereferences the MutexGuard twice, so you instead dereference it once. It's hard to imagine that this contributes much to "Rust's difficult learning curve".

Rather, introducing even more potential implicitness on every `.` seems like it would make the language harder to learn.

Is there an example that really benefits from these features?

> There are Wikipedia pages which are flat out wrong (by any common definition of the term) and yet the editors won't allow any corrections because the primary sources are also wrong.

Not saying that doesn't happen, but do you have an example of such a page?