femiagbabiaka

7 ms·

91.
by femiagbabiaka 10mo ago
I wonder why nobody has tried to beat the Chinese companies at their own game. The whole schtick is: take a product that people like, vertically integrate and drive down costs. This is like the purest form of capitalism.
92.
by femiagbabiaka 10mo ago
Not if they didn't feel that it delivered customer value no? It's about under promising and over delivering, in every instance
93.
by femiagbabiaka 10mo ago
If you are someone for whom this article resonates, you should watch Legend of the Galactic Heroes, the old one, not the new one.
94.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
The HP Zbook Ultra G1A is a contender, but it's also the only contender to your point.
95.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
Thinkpads are probably fine if that's the price point you're shopping at, but the modern ones are not good value. HP has the best mobile workstation available currently.
96.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
The documentation is not great (especially since it tends to document nix-the-language and not the conventions actually used in Nixpkgs), but there are very few languages on earth with more examples of modules than Nix.
97.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
I think I'll take the side of no (as long as it's fast/safe/good) and also I never find the reasoning in these language comparisons to be that compelling anyways. A "why we like $FOO" is better than "why $
98.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
This is pretty much the position of China when it comes to IP law. It's compelling in some senses, but notably the U.S. does not agree.
99.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
This kind of minor fraud is completely normalized within middle and upper classes. It's half the way many kids end up at these schools in the first place, thinking of the "pay-to-play" scandal at USC a while back.
100.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
Search engines aren't just some database lookups, is the thing. There's actually quite a bit of linear alegbra involved in both, for page ranking especially Anyways these sorts of comparisons make no sense to begin with, and quite
101.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
Maybe not mainstream, but Racket.
102.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
The expectation that housing is an investment that should perform like stock is the entire problem IMO.
103.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
Nazism and white nationalism, for starters. This is all gone over in that laughable article. To help, here's the study referenced, which has two, not one, researchers cited: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2511.09685 . They
104.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
I cited an article in my comment to back up my claims. The paper it references is publicly available and goes into more detail. Is that not enough?
105.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
It is not possible to make a good version of Grokipedia while satisfying the requirements of its owner, namely to launder ultra-right viewpoints[1]. 1: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/elon-musk/elon-musk-grokipedia-..
106.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
You're right, and after thinking about it a bit more, I think this TOS is actually more confusing than what came before. Saying explicitly that, e.g. MIT licensed software was allowed (because that license is approved by OSI), makes it
107.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1219 Not true anymore.
108.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
<s>There's nothing about Codeberg that's FOSS only afaict.</s> This was incorrect, I misread the changes to the TOS.
109.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
It's not directly possible, no, but with branch protection rules and this Github action it is trivial to set up: https://github.com/dessant/repo-lockdown
110.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
If you were licensing MIT, ostensibly it’s not the copying you care about, just the attribution. There is always the option to turn off prs, or even distribute code without using github.
111.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
I think there is a funny bit of mental gymnastics that goes on here sometimes, definitely. LLM skeptics (which I'm not saying the Pangram folks are in particular) would say: "LLMs are unreliable and therefore useless, it's pr
112.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
Hmm good point. But to make sure I understand you completely, this only really matters for compute-heavy workloads, right?
113.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
That's a good way of thinking about it, thank you, legitimately.
114.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
I’m at risk of sounding like an atproto shill at this point, but check out https://www.graze.social/ . I think every social media platform should allow something like this. You can make filters that work in either direction.
115.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
In many ways I agree with you. In particular the conglomeration of high percentages of atproto users onto Bluesky owned and moderated algorithms and feeds and the replication of Twitter-style dogpiling combined with the relative lack of ide
116.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
I saw that, and I'm sorry it happened. I thought both the response to your original post and the resulting backlash to both you and everyone who engaged with you sincerely were absurd. I think that because of atproto you have the flexi
117.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
Well that's the thing -- you might be flagged as spam in the Bluesky PDS, but there are other PDS's, with their own feeds and algorithms, and in fact you can make your own if you so choose. That's a lot of work, and Twitter i
118.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
> I personally dont feel like an ultra filtered social media which only shows me things I agree with is a good thing. Exposing yourself to things you dont agre with is what helps us all question our own beliefs and prejudeces, and grow a
119.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
I know that some folks dislike it, but Bluesky and atproto in particular have provided the perfect tools to achieve this. There are some people, largely those who migrated from Twitter, who mostly treat Bluesky like a all-liberal version of
120.
by femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
database normalization and formal verification aren't on the same level of difficulty in terms of implementation, and we all could do the former from the beginning, if we choose to (nobody ever chooses to)

More ›