dnautics

16 ms·

361.
by dnautics 5mo ago
In principle static analysis is possible. (Note: WIP) https://github.com/ityonemo/clr
362.
by dnautics 5mo ago
Oh yeah good point on crispr and the antibody chimeras (which etanercept is) I guess I imagine one of the highest order obstacle to protein therapeutics to be immunogenicity, which is really hard to design around for a de Novo protein
363.
by dnautics 5mo ago
how many therapeutic proteins are there that aren't mabs or ~naturally occurring proteins (insulin, modified insulins, hirudin, cerezyme etc)? I can think of: etanercept
364.
by dnautics 5mo ago
Where does the paper say this?
365.
by dnautics 5mo ago
The math works out if you project certain macro trends out a sufficient amount of time. I think if fusion is real, it might not be so advantageous until space mining is a thing.
366.
by dnautics 5mo ago
Yes, beyond the three things that are the hard parts it's easy.
367.
by dnautics 5mo ago
It's a little bit old, but challenge you opinions about what matters for LLM agentic coding: https://github.com/Tencent-Hunyuan/AutoCodeBenchmark/blob/ma...
368.
by dnautics 5mo ago
> Training data can't be the whole answer. Absolutely correct. Anthropic showed that 250 examples can "poison" an LLM -- independent of LLM activation count.
369.
by dnautics 5mo ago
and yet dynamically typed elixir wipes the floor with go. https://github.com/Tencent-Hunyuan/AutoCodeBenchmark/blob/ma...
370.
by dnautics 5mo ago
yeah, IMO generally explicit is better. It's hard to take something implicit and increase the visibility (I'm aware there are tools to show you lifetimes in rust). But another option is to statically analyze the code (or the IR)
371.
by dnautics 5mo ago
nah, I probably didn't quite read the code correctly. Thanks for the link.
372.
by dnautics 5mo ago
hm, last i checked counters were fully implemented as atomics, it seems now theres another internal bif for "write concurrency", is this new or was it always like this and did i just miss it?
373.
by dnautics 5mo ago
no, in zig it's never unexpected, because if you're freeing memory the freesite is known, it's a function call.
374.
by dnautics 5mo ago
> Can you give some examples? I've never ran into problems due to this. If it's doing a drop in the hot loop that may be an unexpected performance regression that could be carefully lifted. thank you. Unfortunately in the last
375.
by dnautics 5mo ago
> I suppose you could work around that by adding lifetime annotations in zig comments. you can make a no-op function that gets compiled out but survives AIR > rust knows when it can Drop. and its possible to cause problems if you are
376.
by dnautics 5mo ago
It's not.. but im pretty sure it could be. could probably even take this (WIP) idea and bolt on a formal verifier pretty easily. https://github.com/ityonemo/clr
377.
by dnautics 5mo ago
rust does not promise leak safety.
378.
by dnautics 5mo ago
> Wouldn't that mean that it isn't even feasible to make high-quality software with such a tool? plenty of other companies/entities making high quality software in zig? tigerbeetle, zig itself for example. Bun's enti
379.
by dnautics 5mo ago
> "Make text look good on page" leaves lots of details unspecified. Even just a sane layout renderer is incredibly hard. A decade ago I wrote a bespoke DNA sequence typesetter (in svg) and I had claude build an extension, for
380.
by dnautics 5mo ago
Yeah, basic concurrent programming is not more complicated than basic linear programming
381.
by dnautics 6mo ago
> Slash commands, for instance, are a misfeature. I should never have to wait for the chatbot finish a turn so that I can check on the status of my context window or how much money I've spent this session. Control should be orthogon
382.
by dnautics 6mo ago
Yes. Humans are also unreliable and nondeterministic (though certainly more reliable). Accordingly we have built software dev practices around this. I imagine it would be super useful for example to have a "TDD enforcer": Phase
383.
by dnautics 6mo ago
there's a reason why emerald cloud lab pivoted from dna-based computing to cloud lab services.
384.
by dnautics 6mo ago
> You act like we've managed to probe the depths of physics with certainty when in reality you find any means to reject that which offends your sensibilities. At the root of science is "sensibilities", like occam's ra
385.
by dnautics 6mo ago
claude does not struggle with zig? not in my hands anyways.
386.
by dnautics 6mo ago
> LCDM correctly predicts where the dark matter is located after a galaxy collision, such as in the bullet cluster. There is no reasonable interpretation of MOND that has the center of mass of the galaxy shifted away from where it's
387.
by dnautics 6mo ago
2. not a physicist but iiuc the relativistic MONDs have been disappointing? but not enough to rule out
388.
by dnautics 6mo ago
I don't really care (i'm doing just fine fake-internet-points-wise), just if I made a mistake it would be nice to know. Otherwise worth it to know that there are people out there who find "alternative explanations by profess
389.
by dnautics 6mo ago
I mean sure nature has no obligation to not have a unfalsifable particle, but you wind up in weird places, like, there exists a distribution of dark matter that explains the poltergeist that knocked over your coffee cup last week.
390.
by dnautics 6mo ago
I think you mean LCDM only does well on galactic rotation curves because it has free parameters per galaxy. MOND only has one free parameter, maybe two if you use the MOND+Relativity model that doesn't work.

More ›