9rx

48 ms·

871.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> I'll go right a paper for you. Did it fall over?
872.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Hence the previous comment. If Linux was (partially) written in C++, it would no longer work.
873.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Isn't that ultimately a loss of motivation? With enough buy in there would be a lot of reason to keep iterating towards the desired outcome despite any setbacks. That is the nature of experiments, after all. Things going horribly wrong
874.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Isn't successful already implied? Unsuccessful experiments have no end unless motivation to keep trying runs out — but Rust seems to have no end to motivation behind it. Besides, if it were to ever reach the point of there being no rem
875.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Well, that's what the checks are for: So that hallucinations are caught by said checks and can be fed back into the LLM to ruminate on. If you don't find importance in those checks, you wouldn't choose Fil-C anyway. But, of c
876.
by 9rx 11mo ago
As valuable as that diversion no doubt was for you, we still haven't established from your data sources how many people are involved in R&D in a hobby/pleasure/necessity capacity and how that compares to those who have ch
877.
by 9rx 11mo ago
The question asked which UBI studies you were talking about in order to close my gap in being unable to find any. It is clear now that they don't exist, which is fine, but a bit disappointing as I would have loved to see them. There ar
878.
by 9rx 11mo ago
The... article? There is nothing in this subthread about an article. It is an extension on what was asserted in a segment of an earlier comment. At least the source of your confusion is now clear. I suggest you stop doing that stupid HN thi
879.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> Reddit is the most prominent example Reddit was originally just one guy with 100s of accounts. The epitome of writing for oneself. > upvotes were intended to be used for comments that contributed to the discussion. Intent is est
880.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Embarrassed to admit that it does, in fact, look like a computer screen, huh?
881.
by 9rx 11mo ago
That's a pretty good sign that the HN user base as a rule finds most enjoyment in writing high quality content for themselves. All questions are legitimate, but in this circumstance what reason is there to believe that they would find
882.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> people are demonstrating a new behavior that is disrupting social norms The social norm has always been that you write comments on the internet for yourself, not others. Nothing really changes if you now find enjoyment in adding AI o
883.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> The amount of people it takes to maintain a server rack is minimal and low cost labor. So what you're saying is that it requires human oversight. Got it. Glad you finally caught up to where the rest of us were many comments ago.
884.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Perhaps it was wrong to assume. How about you describe what you see and then, from that, we can decide what it is that you are interacting with.
885.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Oh? I've had great luck with LLMs and homemade ILs. It has become my favourite trick to get LLMs to do complex things without overly complicating my side of the equation (i.e. parsing, sandboxing, etc. that is much harder to deal with
886.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> Rust has lots of checks that C and assembly don't, and AI benefits from those checks. Fil-C gets you close in the case of C, but we can ignore it because, of course, F* has significantly more checks than Rust, and AI benefits fr
887.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Garbage to whom? Are we talking about something that the user shudders to think about, or something more like a product the user loves, but behind the scenes the worst code ever created?
888.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Now you are under the impression that a computer screen is able to become upset? That's a new one.
889.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Maybe? inetd subprocesses on UNIX time sharing systems does look to be the first appearance of what we'd recognize as being serverless, but the timesharing concept was already on its way out in favour of personal computers by that time
890.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> Not sure why the snark is necessary. Not sure why you think a computer screen is giving you snark, but you do you. > I'm not an expert You read through all of that data and research, as told earlier, and haven't become
891.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> I like your analysis but it seems to imply that at one point we can produce near-infinite amount of software and that this will be welcome. It implies that there will be no need to share libraries (which is said including things like
892.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> The words "on the other hand" draws a contrast, suggesting that the subject of the sentence before it I know it can be hard for programmers stuck in a programming language mindset, especially where one learned about softwar
893.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Maybe I'm too busy counting my dividend cheques from the co-ops I share ownership in, but I just don't see this prevailing wisdom of which you speak. I mean, I do see it online so I know what you're talking about, but I mean
894.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> Those modes of transport are all equivalent to planes for the point being made. The point is that even those things require oversight from humans. Everything humans do requires oversight from humans. How you missed it, nobody knows.
895.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> What planet are you on? The one where computers don't magically run all by themselves. It's amazing how out of touch HN has become with technology. Thinking that you can throw something up into the cloud, or whatever was im
896.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Computer chess systems don't need developer oversight. They do, however, require oversight from, let's call them, IT people.
897.
by 9rx 11mo ago
All the money in the world would not be sufficient to cover the cost of seeing human developers duplicate Salesforce on any reasonable time scale. There are simply not enough developers in existence to see that happen, driving the cost towa
898.
by 9rx 11mo ago
More like "people will 3D print self-driving cars in their garage" level.
899.
by 9rx 11mo ago
Things like trains, boats, and cars exist. Human chess grandmasters can show up to elite tournaments, and perform while there, without airplanes. Computer chess systems, on the other hand, cannot do anything without human oversight.
900.
by 9rx 11mo ago
> B2C businesses need consumers Businesses need consumers when those consumers are necessary to provide something in return (e.g. labor). If I want beef and only have grass, my grass business needs people with cattle wanting my grass s

More ›