falcor84

But the thing with "pure" math, is that it can unexpectedly get adulterated by debased concerns such as enabling cryptography for the world economy.

I'm not a grifter and am not looking to use this for anything myself, but I just found myself nerdsniped to get Codex to reproduce this, and had it also write it up as a skill - https://droptext.cc/9jfbn

Sorry, I couldn't resist and just got Codex to replicate this for me as an OCR-d page on top of an AI-generated image - https://jsfiddle.net/wmLvojr7/

> Donald Knuth's code would be much more likely to meet my standards during a code review than some LLM output.

Just to nitpick - will it actually? I don't know what your relationship with Donald Knuth is, but to the extent I'm familiar with him and his approach to work, I would expect that even if I could afford him, I would not be able to get him to agree to accept my coding standards, whereas I found that LLMs (although flawed in many ways) can be cajoled relatively effectively to adopt my particular standards.

> "Apple" is a generic name, that does not actually really express anything particularly specific.

...

> "apple" as an idea doesn't really express anything concrete without lots more context.

I understand where you're coming from and appreciate the nuance, but can't help to feel that you've moved the goalposts from the earlier:

> There are no "ideas" independent of expression.

I never meant to claim that ideas have to be concrete or specific, if anything, the best thing about an idea is that it is not any of those.

And it's clear to me that you did perfectly understand what I meant by:

> "apple", "manzana", "pomme", "mela", "maçã"

as you then said "isn't even a fruit", so I was able to effectively communicate to you the abstract idea of a particular type of fruit. Communication of ideas does work to promote coordination of actions (in this case a comment thread on "the same topic"), and while flawed and fuzzy, I don't see how it could function if there were no ideas independent of expression.

But the underlying table changed since. I'm not very familiar with these myself, but it seams to me that the best solution is to keep a session cursor for the user, and these are a lot simpler when you only ever move it forward.

What do you mean? Are you arguing that it's impossible to fully translate things? Would you argue that "apple", "manzana", "pomme", "mela", "maçã" etc. all refer to different ideas?

Nah, that's layer 8

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Layer_8

I don't understand what trust means in this context. Even if I were able to hire Donald Knuth to write all my code, I wouldn't "trust" it to be bug-free, let alone to be the right fit for my needs.

Not the parent, but I just checked and it seems that all $iwords.com are taken for i<18

Why not both?

I promise that I did, and I did not find that; you said that it's "nothing like" but then the rest of it seems to match what I was saying in my analogy. Would you mind please saying more about the difference you see between our opinions?

It sounds like you're fully agreeing with me that it has pretty much nothing to do with the value of the employees and essentially everything with how the employees no longer fit the company's plans.

> Yet today, Microsoft/XBOX decided half the team was deemed USELESS and needed to be let go

I feel that this is an incredibly unfair and demeaning take both towards Microsoft and towards the people being fired. As I see it, getting fired is just like being dumped by a romantic partner. It typically says very little about your value as an individual, and almost everything about their current situation and how the relationship with you fits into their future plans and the other opportunities available to them.

Yeah, I never got Minority Report's focus on punishment. If it was a crime of passion that was prevented and will non be attempted again (according to their predictive powers) why is a punishment needed?

> How will they achieve cleaner code, with fewer workers?

What do you mean? My experience has always been that the more cooks there are in the kitchen, the messier the codebase is. Has yours been different?

> Death Stranding is only a game by the narrowest of margins

I strongly disagree. I'd say that Death Stranding has an incredible open world "sandbox", rivaling the ones of GTA. I can spend dozens of hours there without worrying about the campaign - it's not a Hollywood movie.

Makes perfect sense. It's like in that story about how Bertrand Russell claimed that when you accept a single falsehood, you can prove anything at all. As I recall it, he was then challenged - "let's say 1=0, prove that you're the Pope" and he quickly responded that if 1=0, then after adding 1, you have 2=1, and thus if the Pope and he are 2 people, that means they are 1 person.

I didn't get why they mentioned that one specifically. Is there any particular relationship between Blueprint-bench and Vendor-bench?

Well, for better or worse, markets are becoming increasingly dominated by "non-biological utility maximizers" - mostly hft bots, but now also llm-based reasoning agents.

This has little to do with shareable links and everything to do with the trust you put in whoever you share it with.

There's not much difference between them ctrl+v-ing the link to a third party, vs them ctrl+a, ctrl+c, ctrl+v-ing the contents to another party. If anything, by just sharing a link, you have a chance to disable the sharing and hope the content hasn't yet been copied.

It's absolutely possible for individual employees to have generous vacations, while at the same time maintaining a continuously staffed support function.

Thanks for the examples. I actually kinda like it, as almost being a form of spoken word poetry; but yes, these lists do seem unusual on a second read-through.

I'm not sure what you mean. I can't find a single prominent contributor to transformers who doesn't have a CS background. The closest I found is Jared Kaplan (math and theoretical physics), who came and contributed with mathematical analysis after the architecture was already well-defined.

>Loop engineering” is a hot buzzphrase after mentions of it by Boris Cherny (Claude Code’s creator) and Peter Steinberger (OpenClaw's creator) went viral on social media.

Just adding that context here.

At a WorkOS event discussion on the 2nd of June, Boris Cherny said:

> I don't prompt Claude anymore. I have loops that are running. They're the ones that are prompting Claude and figuring out what to do. My job is to write loops.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RkQQ7WEor7w&time_continue=704

This is then Peter Steinberger's tweet on the 7th of June:

> Here’s your monthly reminder that you shouldn’t be prompting coding agents anymore. You should be designing loops that prompt your agents.

and the immediate response from Gautham Pai:

> Oh god, LinkedIn will now start a new fad, "Loop Engineering". Harness Engineering is so last year. Loop Engineering is what you should be doing.

https://xcancel.com/steipete/status/2063697162748260627

And then Addy Osmani quickly wrote a post about it on the day which triggered a discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48514387

And there was another interesting discussion here about Armin Rochar's more critical take on loops a few days ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48643180

There's a lot that could be said against agentic programming, but I don't understand how it wipes away anyway about CS - everything about this is a massive tower built on top of (and effectively utilizing) everything that we've learned about CS fundamentals and engineering over these decades.

Your comment would've been more valuable if you actually included at least one actual example of evidence.

Another example of Analog Virtual is Hokusai's The Great Wave (and similar prints). I recently watched David Bull's videos about his recreation of it [0] and it was fascinating to hear him tell about how even the "original" prints were made from slightly different woodblocks made in the same workshop.

[0] https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLK-Wicsj5rAasS2g7e-Z9eFUd...

Phoenixing considered harmful

> AI is not capable of writing a movie script that resonates with people like this

I'm reminded of this interview with Casparov from 1989 (less than 10 years before he lost to Deep Blue):

>A machine will always remain a machine, that is to say a tool to help the player work and prepare. Never shall I be beaten by a machine! Never will a program be invented which surpasses human intelligence. And when I say intelligence, I also mean intuition and imagination. Can you see a machine writing a novel or poetry? Better still, can you imagine a machine conducting this interview instead of you? With me replying to its questions?[0]

Well, we have AI beating everyone at chess and conducting interviews...

[0] https://en.chessbase.com/post/edward-winters-che-exploration...