sctb

It's hardcoding an implementation detail of the Go runtime, which is subject to change (and if it did, this library might have non-obvious failure behaviour).

Do you like techno? I find that—with the exception of certain subgenres—a stalwart chunk of techno has resisted the trend towards incorporating vocals.

Do you encounter many AU-only plugins? From what I can tell, the limitations of VST/AU/AAX are more pressing and Bitwig are working to address that with CLAP: https://u-he.com/community/clap.

I text almost exactly like this. Probably both Dimension Apple writers and myself are pretending to be normal in the same way...

> Moreover, one could play word games with the mathematical language, creating problematic statements like “this statement is false” (if it’s true, then it’s false; if it’s false, then it’s true) that indicated there were problems with the axiomatic system.

I hope this isn't too far off topic, but can someone clarify exactly how this problem indicts axioms? As an uninformed and naive musing, it occurs to me that an issue with the statement "this statement is false" is this. The whole of the statement, that is, the thing having truth or falsehood, cannot be addressed by one of its components.

For more Lisp+Immix action there's also Andy Wingo's article and talk about a new GC for Guile from earlier this year:

Article: https://wingolog.org/archives/2023/02/07/whippet-towards-a-n...

Talk: https://fosdem.org/2023/schedule/event/whippet

The flat assembler (which assembles this project) is worth checking out if you haven't already: https://flatassembler.net. I first played around with it almost 20 years ago and it was noticeably more ergonomic and productive than masm, nasm, to say nothing of gas. I imagine it was designed for human programmers rather than primarily compiler front ends, so it's a popular choice for hand-written assembly projects.

At least one major reason is "Interoperate with your existing C++ code, from inheritance to templates" (https://github.com/carbon-language/carbon-lang).

Thanks for the link! I just found the one I was thinking of, which is older but perhaps goes into more detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcUWTa16Jc0&list=PLDU0iEj6f8....

Something that stands out to me from this talk is the idea of linearizing ASTs—I was reminded of Aaron Hsu's work on Co dfns. There was an excellent YouTube video from years ago (does anyone have the link?) where he described how his compiler, written in APL, manages its data in an array-friendly linear fashion.

Would you mind elaborating on this? I'm perusing the source to try to make sense of this comment and all I see is... C.

I might interpret "when icons carried inherent meaning" as something like, "when the physical office desk metaphor was the only game in town". I didn't get much out of the article, but I would agree that the trajectory of icon symbology is necessarily towards the more virtual and more subtle (if that's a point the author is making...).

I went through a period of several years where I was meditating 2-3 hours a day, and during that time I had all kinds of experiences... which isn't so surprising since that's a pretty abnormal thing to do.

> I wonder, what do others make of these superhuman meditation claims?

Not much. I have no reason to be skeptical of their accounts, but they strike me as too personal to be relevant to others. Maybe it's similar to when people report the contents of their dreams, or describe something like synaesthesia. I notice that many mature practitioners do not make any such claims at all.

> How does one verify that their sensations during meditation are real reflections of how the brain works and not just increasingly subtle hallucinations?

What's the difference between "real reflections of how the brain works" and hallucinations? I'm not sure that it's actually necessary to reflect upon one's experience during meditation.

And this article is mostly talking about everyday concepts like learning. But there's no denying that the idea of beginner's mind is used within Zen in a special sense. From Dogen's essay On the Endeavour of the Way:

> Because practice within realization occurs at the moment of practice, the practice of beginner's mind is itself the entire original realization.

Nitpick, but this article quotes Shunryu Suzuki—the other Suzuki—not D.T.

I think it's possible to underestimate the extent to which people can perceive this type of dishonesty, because it may be in the form of an uneasy and largely unconscious experience that leads them to vaguely report "not a good fit".

> It's a dog eat dog world, winners take all and there's no reward for the effort. If you don't win the big prize, you've wasted your life for nothing.

Prizes and rewards are never guaranteed. The only way to be sure you aren't wasting your time is to spend it on something gratifying—in the context of this essay this might be the "excited curiosity that's both the engine and the rudder of great work." You don't need a fallback if your approach isn't outcome oriented.

I didn't read your post as arrogant. You said that, when sober, you tend towards being analytical, technical, and logical. This is your natural tendency in addition to the inertial effect of technical work which you spend most of your time on. To me this all seems like neutral observation.

I would read that as editorial/curatorial power being decentralized.

There have also been a number of studies looking at the effects of the alcohol ban in South Africa during the pandemic lockdown; for example:

https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article/doi/10.1162/rest_a_01228...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211419X2...

Since you mention Advaita, some might find this talk by Swami Sarvapriyananda on "Vedantic Self and Buddhist Non-Self" interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAZPWu084m4.

> I’d go even further, and argue there is no hard problem of consciousness. Just folks who don’t want to accept the obvious answer, we’re thinking animals with a generative world model in our heads.

Supposing that I'm a thinking animal with a generative world model in my head, wouldn't the notion of being a thinking animal necessarily be a part of the generative world model?

And as a third point between these two, a close friend is finishing a postgraduate degree at Oxford and would agree with “The professors were checked out, the classes were bad, and I felt isolated and alienated” but still feels as though it was worthwhile.

I'm not sure the subjective is a candidate for the what/who I'm asking about, since the subjective, not being an object, cannot be in a state of either identification or non-identification. Your second paragraph I don't fully parse.

> Modern neuroscience provides evidence that aligns with the Eastern view, revealing that the left hemisphere of the brain constantly creates narratives to interpret reality, leading to a mistaken identification with these self-narratives. This false sense of self, which is often equated with the incessant internal dialogue, contributes significantly to human mental suffering.

What or who is identifying with self-narratives, and what or who suffers? What is the stable entity which could experience internal dialogue as incessant?

It's neat to see ongoing Co-dfns work from Aaron and others! There are a number of YouTube videos online if anyone is interested in very cool and esoteric yet serious programming: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDU0iEj6f8duXzmgnlGX4....

There is a Japanese carpenter with 50 years of experience on YouTube who documents his construction of entire homes, which I would recommend to anyone who is interested in modern Japanese wood construction:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdf5QHEpfrg3KydeT3iD2IQ (English)

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdrVc2ByfvnNW14R6o_WpkA (Japanese)

I've heard "low support needs" vs. "high support needs" suggested, which is similar to the language used in the DSM severity levels.

Thanks! Updated from “Hong Kong Blocks Private Internet Access”.