whlr

According to [1], they want to use a systems-level language for performance.

[1] https://www.roc-lang.org/faq#self-hosted-compiler

If I'm understanding properly, this would be called a "coop" in NYC. I don't think any other cities in the US have them in significant number.

Not a linguist, but I think this is just a matter of proto-indo-european having complicated morphology and its descendants reverting to the mean.

A related reddit thread (I know, I know, sorry): https://old.reddit.com/r/linguistics/comments/o12hy0/instanc...

It's worth noting of course that there is more to grammar than morphology.

I don't think it's true that languages get simpler over time.

I think it's possible to sidestep the harm vs suboptimality discussion. It's clear that there is a benefit to the public when works become public domain, and copyright law should balance benefits to creators and consumers (though of course we all fill both roles to some degree). Laws also have to be politically viable, of course.

> Using your logic, the government then ought to force you to donate all your savings and excess possessions to "society" so that harm is reduced.

I would argue that governments do a "soft" version of this with redistributive tax schemes and social programs.

It’s worth noting that PyPlot.jl is a nearly seamless way to use matplotlib from Julia. JIT compilation of the middle layer does mean that it suffers from time to first plot problems though.

Don’t know much about this, but I would have thought TikTok relies on the watch patterns of its viewers, rather than direct video analysis.

Because it looks imperative.

It can still work on a population level.

That is the version of the |> operator I'm familiar with from Julia.

> I find the latter easier to read and lends itself to a fluent, lightweight style.

Maybe I'm bikeshedding, but I think this is a nontrivial part of why people like OOP languages. Being able to read right to left, without nested parens, makes code comprehension easier.

I think the mathematical notation for function application has held programming languages back. I realize that there's a huge benefit to uniformity of syntax across languages, and that syntax is ultimately much less important than semantics, but I wish we could settle on something better than f(x). I really appreciate languages that are willing to do something different (e.g. haskell and lisp).

I'm not convinced that Berman's map shows weeknight and weekend service massively better than the current one, which includes that info with the key. I find the symbols on Berman's map a bit confusing, and I suspect I would have to reference the key, negating their benefit.

On the other hand, citymapper, google maps, etc. make showing the "outside world" on a subway map less important than in the past, so perhaps it's time to reevaluate.

I think the current map really shines in lower manhattan, where the stops closest to the staring/ending location aren't always the best ones to get on.

It's rush-hour-only service. He's using the notation from the official map [1], but I think he forgot to put it in the key.

[1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3a/Official...

I dunno. It looks like an improvement on the Vignelli map, but I think the less pretty one the MTA uses today is more functional.

(paywalled) article: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1139-x

This also happens with rivers! It's incredibly annoying.

> This doesn't speak to Go's simplicity so much as it does to Go's conservatism.

I think this really hits the nail on the head. There are benefits to a conservative approach, but it's not the same as simplicity.

There are some parallels, but I don't know if the writing:editing::programming:testing analogy is very strong. I think editing is more like refactoring than anything else, but I hesitate to make parallels between code and prose in general.

I like julia a lot (use it everyday, it's my primary language right now), but this isn't really a reasonable recommendation, imho. Julia seems like it could be really great for ML, but I'm not sure if the current libraries are mature enough to wholeheartedly recommend.

I'd love to be proven wrong about that, though.

Is it established that internal dialogue is facilitated by our language faculties, though? That’s certainly not was I would guess from my subjective experience.

I'm not 100% sure if I agree with this or not, but a related idea is that physics shouldn't be taught without the necessary math as a pre- or co-requisite. I'm thinking particularly of non-calc-based mechanics classes, which I loathe.

I'm curious how you envision a calculus class that would make the topic more tangible. I think we can agree that typical calculus classes are more abstract (for lack of a better term) than typical english, history, or science classes.