Title probably meant "AI Pioneer".
1,178 karma · joined October 3, 2010
In theory, if a member state implements a directive in a way that is not faithful, it might risk a fine from the EU, but member states generally do not care much about it, I am not even sure if all of the fines that have been issued in the past have been paid...
<<A physicist, a computer scientist and a mathematician find themselves in prison. They all brag to each other that thanks to their superior knowledge, they will manage to escape relatively soon, and decide to bet they will be all out by one month. In the following month, the phyisicist gathers leftofers from meals, steals a few products from the janitors, and manages to assemble a corrosive substance that breaks the bars of his cell. He is out in 3 weeks. The computer scientist uses his weekly phonecalls to hack into the prison system, little by little. He manages to set the bars of his cell to open automatically right on the night of the 30th day, when he escapes. Out of his cell, he decides to go and check on his friends: the physicist is gone, instead the mathematician is dead in his cell in front of a long text on a wall which starts with "Proof: I will escape from prison. Reductio ad absurdum: let's assume I am already out of the prison...">>
This being said, you can learn WebGL and especially Three.js without knowing the pipeline as described there, but knowing it will help you understand some subtleties or if you ever want to move to a lower level.
Well, not really. Some of the people on twitter (and the author himself) basically pointed out that "one of the main reason we do not use that coding style is that, despite the advantages, when you need to work on a codebase that requires both performant simulation of the planet and rapid experimentation of mechanics at the same time by hundreds of de-localized devs, you end up seeing many of its limitations". If you want to handle this argument, you need to have a clear idea of what are the priorities in such a scenario, which I doubt the author has. Even more interestingly, the article does not raise the point "this is how I write modern C++, I think it will benefit all the industries" but specifically seems to want to argue that this style helps gamedev particularly despite showing basically no domain-specific observations, nor anything that convinces me he knows what are the critical problems in the "triple A game" scenario... I don't think I can call this gatekeeping if I am not convinced - even by reading only the article - that the author has a good grasp of the fundamental problems involved in the development of big games, or not?
Well, that would be a good question to ask to the author, since he titled the article "modern C++ gamedev" and not simply "modern C++" although to me what is discussed seems to be general enough, and "gamedev" here happens to be just the type of project the code comes from... To me, it does not look like he makes any significant contribution on how "modern C++ could serve specifically games development". IMHO he has detected that people in games react strongly to content about C++ and he benefits from the additional exposure he gets by putting "gamedev" in his C++ articles/tweets/anything (which is something I am not judging btw).
Personally, I do think that when your code is simulating a whole parallel universe using a not-super-high-level language, you might end up with challenges regarding readability and flexibility of the raw code that other softwares might not encounter. Not being really part of that industry I feel I can't know for sure, and therefore I have applied the same reasoning to him since he is also not part of that industry, it seems.
For years (but even now) Artificial Intelligence meant understanding how intelligent behaviors worked, and then understand what is the sequence of "if-then"s that could express those behaviors in an artificial setting. Use statistical inference is a "hack" (unavoidable, often) to cover the cases in which such behaviors seem to be too complex to be grasped - and then expressed - by one simple and/or comprehensive algorithm, but the (possibly unattainable) ideal would be having everything expressed as "pretty much an if-then statement" indeed.
See, this is something I never fully understood: people told me the same, but I mean, when somebody is allowed to go to the gemeente (town hall, kind of) and say "hello, I want to register as a legal resident of this address, I don't have a contract or anything and in fact I am squatting the building. Can I?" and the answer is "ok", I consider this somehow "explicit legislation", at least in practice, no?
I have lived in the NL just when the change in squatting legislation was happening (2009-2015). My impression was that more and more parties that were ideologically against it got popular and this changed the agenda of policymakers, given also the pressure estate investors that were hunting for a treasure. But existing squats were definitely well integrated with the cities I lived in (Utrecht, Amsterdam), sign that this law somehow became part of the city identity.
Indeed, the course did upset people. I remember how people constantly complained how shitty this decision was, how "people in the 1st year engineering classes are doing real Java programming while we do this shit no employer asks for", some noted how the language was stupid, or in the best case just a toy, useless in "the real world". Thing got worse when some people realized that, contrary to their expectations, they did not know how to program, since they could not do eg. graph traversals once that was stripped of its OOP or Java-like envelope - "I will fail the year because of the bloody scheme!", they would say.
To me, instead, it was revelatory. We did indeed solve one problem per week, and although the problems were less sexy than the ones I was expecting (finding the max of a list is not the coolest thing in the world), promises were kept, and little by little I started appreciating how much you could express with so few lines or predefined functions, leveraging only on very few concepts (eg. recursion), it was different from the programming we had done in high school. It was also a big difference with the university classes of philosphy, where "assistant professors" (underpaid PhD [students]) will come to read you a book AND a comment to it, with very little intellectual work needed from either them or students. I quickly decided to follow only Computer Science. I became no black belt lisper or anything, but that style of programming, of looking at problems, software and the whole field certainly influenced me. I am currently enjoying my role at a FAANG company, and thinking about all of this made me want to write her an email to thank her, but the saddest thing is that I can't do it because right at the end of that academic year, Ms Busi actually died, unexpectedly, at the age of only 39. First year student of CS in Bologna now learn Python programming.
(this is her uni page if you are curious: http://www.cs.unibo.it/~busi/)