anon291

27 ms·

571.
by anon291 1y ago
Python is slightly better because it can mostly be manipulated beyond recognition due to strong metaprogramming but pythons operator madness is dangerous. Random code can run at any minute. It's useful for something's and a good
572.
by anon291 1y ago
It's kind of crazy that OOO is sold to people as 'thinking about the world as objects' and then people expect to have an object, randomly take out a part, do whatever they want with it and just stick it back in and voila This
573.
by anon291 1y ago
Inheritance is not a fundamental concept of anything. Inheritance is just composition with syntactic sugar. The semantic meaning was always composition. Oop is a mistake. Rust and pythons explicit self passing and turning of the dot operato
574.
by anon291 1y ago
There is no better UI for text editing that I have ever come across. I'm not sure why so many people are resistant to the idea that emacs has the correct answer to most UI issues. More programs would stand to take lessons from emacs. E
575.
by anon291 1y ago
Photons have no mass. Massive particles cannot travel at c. Massive particles experience time. Photons have momentum because they contain energy, but no mass. Momentum being expelled is how the mass is accelerated. You don't need a pro
576.
by anon291 1y ago
very useful when writing toy assemblers in Haskell as loeb let's you easily resolve labels to addresses once you've output the other instructions. Also a good use of the tardis monad which does the same thing as loeb but with a bi
577.
by anon291 1y ago
Everything makes sense when you see I for what it is -- an escape from the number line rotated by ninety degrees. Even the roots of a parabola that doesn't hit the z axis are actually the roots of the ninety degree rotated inverse anal
578.
by anon291 1y ago
I mean perhaps fair enough. Mumbai is looking really nice these days. Legitimately to the point where i think it would be fun to visit (as opposed to our visits growing up which I dreaded). > What makes you think they don't exist in
579.
by anon291 1y ago
The jobs, the buzz, the popularity... That's all part of it. Mumbai has some of that appeal within India obviously. In SF you are competing with the world. I'm not sure why there is such an unwillingness to admit Mumbai and SF are
580.
by anon291 1y ago
In general, determining if two arbitrary reals are the same is impossible per the halting problem. People claim to measure 'real' numbers. This is a lie. People can only measure rational numbers. A real number is either a rational
581.
by anon291 1y ago
My grandparents bungalow is literally a block away from Dharavi. Guys... You are completely off base on this one. Everything you say is right about cheapness and such, but let's be honest about where you'd rather live. The increas
582.
by anon291 1y ago
Yeah sure Mumbai is safer than America when it comes to crime. All India is, contrary to popular belief (India has a very low homicide rate compared to the USA). But when it comes to accidental deaths or preventable deaths due to infra, it&
583.
by anon291 1y ago
There's nothing mysterious about AI. It's matrix and tensor ops which have been used for decades now. Hardware is pretty good at such things because memory accesses are nicely arranged.
584.
by anon291 1y ago
Nonsense. The constitution holds that both individuals have an equal right to acquire the same money. People value different things. The constitution does not demand that people have an equal platform. This is like a preacher complaining th
585.
by anon291 1y ago
This is honestly incredibly wrong. My family is from Mumbai. Like literally the indigenous people of Mumbai and I grew up in CA and lived many years in the bay. The idea that anywhere in India is remotely comparable to the bay area (except
586.
by anon291 1y ago
X*X + 1 = 0 is a fundamental statement on an algebraic rings behavior with the additive and multiplicative identities and the additive and multiplicative group operations. Namely, it says that the ring contains an element that when multipli
587.
by anon291 1y ago
No not at all. I is just something that behaves as if it is equivalent to negative one (that is, the additive inverse of the multiplicative identity) after combining it with itself in some way. We commonly call this multiplication. If such
588.
by anon291 1y ago
I mean it's trivial to do quantum math without the imaginary units. Just rename the solutions to algebraic polynomials something else and continue. There is nothing strange about i and claims contrary to that misunderstand what it even
589.
by anon291 1y ago
Corporations have no rights apart from the people that comprise them. I have no idea why people believe this. Even the corporate money in campaign thing is literally because people who own corporations have rights to donate, not the corpora
590.
by anon291 1y ago
Functions that return types are indeed at a higher level than those that don't. Values can be seen as Singleton types. The key difference is the universe they live in. In the universe of types, the level one level below is perceived as
591.
by anon291 1y ago
Why isn't money speech? Like I don't like that money influences politics, but ignoring corporations completely... can anyone explain why some person should not be able to spend their money to make their point? It all boils down to
592.
by anon291 1y ago
I mean we live in a country where 'defund the police' and 'eliminate jails' are considered somewhat mainstream legal positions (In that there are many politicians elected to office throughout the country who have held th
593.
by anon291 1y ago
Corporate personhood means nothing of what you think it means. People get irrationally angry because we use words that sound the same, even though in no case are corporations ever treated as human beings (duh...). We might as well call it &
594.
by anon291 1y ago
The are already liable and have always been liable if it can be shown they had knowledge of it. The logic is already applied. Corporations are not people, but they are legal persons. For some reason, using language that sounds the same make
595.
by anon291 1y ago
The treating of a corporation as a 'person' (which is a widely held misconception that doesn't really exist) rests in English common law, not any statute. Corporate personhood does not mean anything of what most people think
596.
by anon291 1y ago
Very nice. I think people don't appreciate enough the correspondence between linear algebra, differential equations, and wave behavior. Roughly speaking, it seems the network is essentially converting binary digits to orthogonal basis
597.
by anon291 1y ago
Bad take. People said the same about c/c++ and now rust and zig are considered potential rivals. The ramp up is slow and there's never going to be a moment of viral adoption the way we're used to with SaaS, but change takes p
598.
by anon291 1y ago
I've been in compiler engineering now for almost a decade. No grad school, just moved into the field and did a lot of random projects for my own entertainment (various compilers for toy languages, etc). It takes a particular type of pe
599.
by anon291 1y ago
Nice! I wonder if there's a mathematical theorem to describe the possible shapes for a 2-d venn diagram of N sets or if there's an N for which it is no longer possible (or maybe it's possible for all N!?). Probably an applica
600.
by anon291 1y ago
The main difference between the US and the UK is that American startups are building platforms for the world, whereas UK ones often consume those platforms. The platform holder holds the strategic keys. The efficiency of the market system i

More ›