hyperbrainer

This sounds fascinating. Do you have a reference?

One of the best books I have read in recent years, somehow immensely relevant now: _Eccentric Orbits: The Iridium Story_ by John Bloom, that explores exactly what went wrong, the bankruptcy filing and so on. I wonder if you might find your experiences reflected there.

AlexandertheOk's documentary on Elite and the BBC Micro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC4YLMLar5I

Context for those unaware: https://xkcd.com/1053/

Customer Data Platform

I download and use parts dimensioned in metric to ISO standards all the time...

> "highly paramteric like fastners, gears, 3D printed boxes"

1. These parts should probably be on McMaster. If you are not using them straight from there, you better have a _great_ reason as to why not when it comes up in the design review.

2. Solidworks has Smart Fasteners, Inventor has Spur Gear Component Generator, Sketch->Extrude->Shell takes 30 seconds, so not sure why 3D printed boxes would be faster or better with this for most stuff. Also, this stuff is easily solved by things like the component library and configurations.

I have to start reading from the top instead of skimming.

Reminds me of the Cosmopolitan project: https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan

I do not know enough to analyse these chips in any meaninful way, but is there a trend or cool feature to be seen across?

There is also all the helpful work that Mathworks does such as Simulink ... Also, consider that MATLAB works much more like how one would write on paper (including 1-indexing) and is what people are used to at this point.

> If an engineer came to you and said “So for this project, I put all the code, input data, output data and comments scattered about one big two-dimensional array with no type safety, no portability, no scalability, no security, no variable names, no code re-use, no unit tests, no integration tests, no abstractions and no error handling”

So, how is this different from engineers and MATLAB?

Now I wonder if I can make category theory diagrams in spreadsheets.

Irrelevant but spreadsheets have always struck me as one of the most beautiful pieces of software that we use. Automatically updating calculations, programming logic complex anough for most ERPs, using it is a database, easy organisation of data, graphs -- it has it all. From both a user and developer perspective, they are one of the most diverse tools on a computer. MS may make terrible software sometimes, but damn it, does Excel run the world.

That's the first thing on the page.

> Interviewer: “What happens if you allocate memory with C’s malloc and try to free it with Rust’s dealloc, if you get a pointer to the memory from C?”

> Me: “If we do it via FFI then there’s a possibility the program may continue working (because the underlying structs share the same memory layout? right? …right?)”

I see it as beautiful the same way Galadriel would be beautiful as the Dark Queen. Utterly captivating and powerful, and yet something that should never be.

If functions are first class, then they must be stored as variables. I mean, consider any FP Language.

My first thought was that this was done with consideration for mobile phones, since many higher-end models use 120 Hz displays, but Ladybird does not seem to support mobile for now.

> Websites using requestAnimationFrame now render at up to 120Hz on supported hardware

But the phrasing of it about "can now" suggests to me that this may simply be a performance issue too. They changed it from 60 to 120. Perhaps in the future they can go from 120 to 144 or even 240.

> the future of SQLite is basically guaranteed on account of being open source

I am not concerned with whether it has a future. But I do fear that the absolute manic focus on code quality, testing and support may take a dive when other programmers take the helm. I am not claiming that there are no developers who are equally careful and/or skilled, but whether the culture of SQLite will persist is, to me, still an open question.

I have never used SQLx, but the best SQL integration I can think of is LINQ. How does this compare to that?

I have been experimenting with rendering fonts in Rust lately. I was pleasantly surprised by how simple reading the ttf file format is. The hard part, of course, is actually doing everything with the bezier curves and contours and filling the insides etc. But if I were to just be working with straight lines, I already have everything I need. Indeed, I used MATLAB's `patch` to quickly check my progress and see the major bugs in my rendering implementations, and got there within a couple hours.

And in the last few years, access has grown tremendously, a big part of which has been Jio's aggressive push with ultra-cheap plans.

> we cannot just require all generic parameters to be Clone, as we cannot assume they are used in such a way that requires them to be cloned.

I don't understand what "used in such a way requires them to be cloned" means. Why would you require that?

I wonder whether CV models could help speed this up. There is the obvious challenge of pieces not fitting together exactly, being broken or otherwise defaced etc. but then humans are struggling with the same thing, just that computers have far better memories.

The water also serves the purpose of reducing reflecting acoustic energy.

Related: https://github.com/ocaml/RFCs/blob/881b220adc1f358ab15f7743d...

To be clear, this is not my review. I just found it very interesting and relevant to my own work.

Most table tennis players don't play at the level of the World Cup.

If you wish to approach Category Theory from the viewpoint of a programmer, not a mathematician, I suggest Bartosz Milewski's book Category Theory for Programmers. For this, all you need is some previous programming experience. He uses C++ and Haskell iirc but as long as you can read snippets of code, you'll be fine.

I am suggesting this since you said you want to better understand functional programming. Category Theory, as mathematicians look at it, is an extremely abstract field. If you want to do pure math related stuff in Category Theory, and only then, I would say important prereqs are Abstract Algebra and Topology. I believe the motivation for Category theory lies in Algebraic Geometry and Algebraic Topology, but you definitely don't need to be an expert on these to learn it.