fouric

54 ms·

481.
by fouric 6y ago
> not opinionated enough to compete with Lisp/Haskell Interesting - you seem to be saying that Lisp is very opinionated. If that was your intent, may I ask why? Your experience doesn't jibe with my experience as a Common Lisp u
482.
by fouric 6y ago
This is called "judging a book by its cover". Merely making assessments of an article after only reading a fraction of it (or the title!) is bad enough, but spreading those misunderstandings to other people is even worse - not onl
483.
by fouric 6y ago
> Daniel Gackle will ban your ass if you point out, for example, that he tolerates and even welcomes extremely bigoted shit. Citation needed - this claim is very far from my own experience. If you think you'll be banned, then email
484.
by fouric 6y ago
...which is an entirely valid criticism of existing studies - unlike GP's post.
485.
by fouric 6y ago
If I were a major, anticompetitive ISP, the minute I found out about this tool, I would figure out how to fingerprint it, and then artificially inflate results by giving priority and bonus bandwidth to its tests. What is this app doing to p
486.
by fouric 6y ago
> I’ve always thought these studies were stupid Why? I can't see any reason why studies that try to determine which method of note-taking leads to the most knowledge comprehension is "stupid" - in fact, this is one of th
487.
by fouric 6y ago
In fact, the vector maps article contains this text: > (Hmm, reminds me of my noteshrink project…) ...so the author did, in fact, explicitly consider this possibility.
488.
by fouric 6y ago
> revision history > nice-to-have I think that explicit changelogs for a journalistic document are actually necessary in order to verify the trustworthiness of the publisher - how else are you going to notice when they start silently
489.
by fouric 6y ago
Any tool that is meant to be so low-level as to not come with undo should be a library, not a command shell that can (and is expected to be) used by non-technical users.
490.
by fouric 6y ago
Possibly because programmers have a higher tolerance for learning new, inconsistent (CLI) interfaces, partially because they're anticipating future rewards (greater efficiency, flexibility, job market, etc). Meanwhile, new and inconsis
491.
by fouric 6y ago
I think that this isn't always the case. Some peoples' brains (such as mine, I believe) are more wired to be symbolic . I suspect that, for these people, using a textual-command-oriented CLI interface is going to be noticeably ea
492.
by fouric 6y ago
> they often require more resources, are less powerful and hard to automate via scripting That's not a problem with the GUI paradigm, that's a problem with the current implementations of it. Current implementations of CLI/
493.
by fouric 6y ago
...and, to build on this: the fact that this is Apple's fault means that it's not the fault of the GUI paradigm - just Apple's implementation of it.
494.
by fouric 6y ago
> every bad word said, bad deeds I suggest reading the whole comment before replying. It's pretty blindingly obvious from the whole context that "unreturned books" is meant to be sarcastic.
495.
by fouric 6y ago
> All of the software I have ever used fits into one of three categories: I think that almost every piece of software ever written is "bad", and that the majority is even worse at the level of "terrible" - so I agree
496.
by fouric 6y ago
> Stop infantilising users, it's disrespectful and counter productive. Yet another logically-vacuous emotionally-manipulative statement. The equally-manipulative counter-argument to that is "You're not emphasizing with the
497.
by fouric 6y ago
> Predictive coding is the idea that BNNs generate a mental model of their environment and then transmit only the information that deviates from this model. Predictive coding considers error and surprise to be the same thing. This remind
498.
by fouric 6y ago
Optimizing for "simple" for the sake of robustness is exactly backward. > visible and understandable False. Something is neither visible nor understandable if it's misleading - which file extensions are. There are absolute
499.
by fouric 6y ago
Neither is the opinion that "This problem exists because someone wrote a tool that should only do one (really well) and but instead made it do five different things." You can make security bugs in simple tools - this security bug
500.
by fouric 6y ago
I think that the comparison between software and physical goods breaks down a bit in this particular instance. If you don't have a snowblower, no amount of time spent on your own will allow you to get one - you have to get the physical
501.
by fouric 6y ago
Rust's "compile-time code execution" is a horrendously complex joke, and it's compile times are so atrociously long that the lack of those two things you mentioned is even worse than in a language like C (with somewhat
502.
by fouric 6y ago
> Incremental compilation, edit-and-continue are available in Visual C and C++. In a particular toolchain not available cross-platform - not comparable to Zig having it available in the reference implementation, which is open-source and
503.
by fouric 6y ago
> irresponsible for the future of software development Not true. This is highly interchangeable tooling - it can have whatever dependencies you want, because there's no "dependency explosion" that happens with libraries.
504.
by fouric 6y ago
> Zig is too uninteresting to eclipse anything. As someone who knows C and not Zig, Zig is very interesting. It has incremental compilation, in-place binary patching, the ability to use code before declaration in a file, compile-time c
505.
by fouric 6y ago
I suspect that Zig will still end up eclipsing Rust - not because it's a "more powerful" language, but because it's much easier to learn. Lower barriers of entry seem to matter more than mere "power" - see Comm
506.
by fouric 6y ago
It should be pretty easy for someone to differentiate between the Chinese people and the Chinese government. Meanwhile, can you prove that this "innate xenophobia" is present in every human to an extent that it's actually rel
507.
by fouric 6y ago
> This is malware, and the services which distribute it are malware distributors. Malware has been distributed through open-source repositories multiple times before, so by your convoluted definition of "malware distributors",
508.
by fouric 6y ago
I am a user, and programmer, informed about both the commercial app store models and package repositories. I am perfectly fine with commercial app stores - there's absolutely nothing wrong with the concept. Are Google and Apple's
509.
by fouric 6y ago
In their defense, just because a platform has a large number of users doesn't mean that it's "working" (for some definitions of working). I use Android, but not because I like it, but because I have to. There are apps
510.
by fouric 6y ago
> The plain truth of the matter is that commercial app stores are malware distributors, and community repositories are not. Citation needed. > The commercial app store model does not work, at least not for the user. The hundred of mil

More ›