paulhilbert

No, it's not. It sounds exactly like Tim Pritlove when he speaks German. Not everyone is a native speaker, you know?

In one of his recent podcasts he explained that he wanted to create a mixture of Google Earth and a libray. So "Library" is specifically meant as a name for the mixed data source aggregation.

To be clear: The entire software is vibecoded in a language Pritlove doesn't even have worked with prior to that. But when it comes to talking about his ideas Pritlove surely does not need a LLM. This guy basically started the German podcast scene and has been talking about software for at least 30 years.

No, I would argue that from the three main ingredients - training data, model source code and weights - weights are the furthest away from something akin to source code.

They're more like obfuscated binaries. When it comes to fine-tuning only however things shift a little bit, yes.

That is an orthogonal discussion.

I need masonry layouts a lot and tend to be on the "we don't need another display class" side in this debate. But that's unrelated to my "rant".

I mean the actual point of the article is to ask everyone, not just "well-known" examples.

So it seems there were some reasonably forces in the discussion that align with my stance without the unnecessarily antagonistic (and rhetoric) primer I should've probably left out.

Seems like a good approach to widen the discussion and improve the design.

Again: when did "well-known websites use this" become the motivating factor behind standard design?

The blink tag was used by well-known website and it's universally recognized as a bad decision.

Where is the connection to "well-known websites"?

I totally get that. But for me there is a fundamental difference between "big enough need" and "well known websites need this".

How are potentially thousands of niche websites less of an argument than "instagram and co don't need it"?

"Others are questioning whether or not this kind of layout is needed on the web at all — they aren’t sure that well-known websites will use it."

Would it instead be possible to exclude anyone with that attitude from a discussion about an open standard? I know this sounds toxic, but I would argue that approaching public design this way is ultimately more toxic wrt the outcome and those affected by it.

Or maybe I misunderstood that part since everyone seems to not be bothered by it at all here...

"Flox began its life during the deployment of Nix at the D. E. Shaw group, where it quickly proved invaluable by making Nix easier for newcomers".

Is that the line you are referring to? Sounds like the opposite of what you suggests it says.

Not at all. In fact I would call doing that the most German thing you can do.

"Having a few hundred consumer GPUs or a few dozen "datacenter" GPUs should be within the reach of any University department"

That was funny - however not even close to reality. I have to work on a GTX 1080 (not TI)...

Try pressing esc every few seconds for 8-12hrs a day like a vim developer does and you'll know.

Seems like something there should be a 99pi episode about (maybe there is?)...

Is there any way I can see the name of attached files?

This exactly - complete recountability and the fact that there actually are independent volunteers recounting are the only assurances of a transparent, legitimate voting system. Black boxes (and computer systems by their nature are black boxes) introduced into this system will always void its transparency.

Obligatory 99% invisible reference: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/oyster-tecture/

AFAIK current state-of-the-art in pathtracing are still metropolis light transport methods. Seems like current research is mostly focussed on denoising - which makes sense, since a good denoising provides a valuable shortcut for quicker results.

While I only occasionally glance at new results in this area it seems that CNN-based denoising techniques look quite promising, possibly getting us close to viable real-time pathtracing at least for "suitable" scenes. I am more confident than ever that a shift to traced renderers could be next - this has nothing to do with RTX and the buzz around it though...

I wonder why this gets downvoted - seems pretty reasonable to me...

So this is basically misusing the compiler as an impractial script interpreter?

Too bad Linux still has no proper mouse support... I would be glad if even the games that are Linux native would be playable...

Are you criticizing the naming of the television show? If so I don't think the makers (can) read HN comments...

Compared to vue, qt and all its reincarnations are a nightmare to work with.

No one claimed it is...

Actually C++ these days is moving more towards strong typing and immutability - imho the exact opposite of JavaScript...

No, I would never argue for C++. The reason being mostly its toolsets (constantly changing, instable and often incoherent). I just don't think readability is an argument - and I am as sick of (pointless) arguments against C++'s readability as you are about goto arguments :) Edit: Just to be clear - there are actual arguments against C's readability. For example when figuring out where and when data gets deleted - but as others have pointed out dynamic memory management is a whole different beast in kernel wonderland.

So goto spaghetti is understandable? And dropping those isn't an argument since proper C++ usage also implies agreeing on a proper subset of the language to use. Modern C++ with sane restrictions is way more easy to understand. Especially w.r.t. resource ownership and lifetimes (as pointed out).

Yes. I work in CS in the field of Computer Graphics and (by association) Computer Vision and Robotics. Our top conferences and journals are by ACM. However there are a few journals by Elsevier and IEEE which are relevant. I do not have (legal) access to any of those three. However there are publishers who allow authors private/institutional hosting of their papers without paying additional open access fees. I would still doubt their legitimacy in tax funded research results...

I read this quite often and frankly do not understand it. How is Elsevier worse than ACM, IEEE or Springer? I found them to be equally intolerable but still Elsevier gets routinely picked as the prime example...

Having seen the state-of-the-art in action (https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.00730) I find the results pretty disappointing. Is there anything I miss?

Yeah - that is a "moderate" on the Torvalds scale...