hither_shores

5 ms·

1.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> misleading manner by labeling speculative ethical behavior as “EA” when it’s neither effective I agree that they're ineffective, but I don't see any evidence that the MIRI types are lying - they're trying to help, they t
2.
by hither_shores 4y ago
I don't know about "EA rationales", but rule utilitarianism is unpopular among philosophers largely because it's believed to collapse into act utilitarianism. The phil101 caricature is that rule utilitarianism says &quot
3.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> what precisely has the EA movement done to reduce, even marginally, the risk of a nuclear war? Nothing that I'm aware of. In general I think that most of the current "longtermist" organizations are useless - but that doe
4.
by hither_shores 4y ago
When did I say it did?
5.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> Consequently, we should divert money away from the welfare of people living today and towards efforts that maximize the likelihood of a galaxy filled with colonized planets. If that sounds ridiculous, it's because it is. It sounds
6.
by hither_shores 4y ago
If by "EA the organization" you mean the Center for Effective Altruism, it came out of the Oxford philosophy department.
7.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> Haskell is basically a category theory framework. Haskell probably draws more from category theory than any other mainstream language, but in absolute terms that's still not very much. It's okayish for modelling cartesian clo
8.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> You could rephrase Lisp as a Unityped system, but I seriously doubt it would be consistent. It's not. (x -> x) is always inhabited, so if you have a fixed point combinator (x -> x) -> x then every theorem is true.
9.
by hither_shores 4y ago
No, it isn't. A star-autonomous cartesian category is just a preorder. Chu(Set, n) is star-autonomous but not a preorder, and therefore not cartesian. Or more concretely: cartesian categories are models for type systems with copying an
10.
by hither_shores 4y ago
There's not really a connection here, the category of vector spaces isn't cartesian closed.
11.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> Was Tolkien right leaning himself, I would be surprised by that but I honestly don’t know. Yes, but the small-c conservative Catholic sort of right-wing. He would have hated reactionary modernists like Thiel.
12.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> But some sets of data and some operations on them that fulfill some formally stated requirements are just an abstract algebra, aren't they? Not quite. A variety of algebras (which is usually what people have in mind when they talk
13.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> Addition is move and multiplication is also a move. a + b move from 0 a step then b steps. a * b is move a step b times. By "move" do you mean adding 1? If so, then no. Consider, for instance, the complex numbers: multiplicat
14.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> It's mentioned later, but the "math friendly" versions satisfy the axioms of a group and a field, which only works if the modulus is a prime. The integers mod n >= 1 are always a group (under addition), only the field
15.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> Imagine I want to test a function that operates on quite large application state but not all app state is necessary for that function If not all app state is necessary for that function, it shouldn't require the whole app state in
16.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> Whether or not a particular email address is verified or not isn't something that's generally known at compile time Yes, obviously. What is knowable at compile time is the stuff that comes after: given that the input to t
17.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> sendToEmail sends to any kind of Email. That's my point, you don't need a combinatorial explosion of behaviors for every possible most-specific-type, you can just reuse existing ones. > And if the code wants to know if an
18.
by hither_shores 4y ago
newtype ArbitrarilyLabeled x = ArbitrarilyLabeled x forgetLabel :: ArbitrarilyLabeled x -> x forgetLabel (ArbitrarilyLabeled x) = x What's the "global meaning" of `ArbitrarilyLabeled`? What contr
19.
by hither_shores 4y ago
Java and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race
20.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> You'll need sendToUnverifiedEmail(email: UnverifiedEmail) and sendToVerifiedEmail(email: VerifiedEmail), and have code to get the right type to pass to the right function the in the right circumstance... Only if you're using
21.
by hither_shores 4y ago
Yes, but the mapping doesn't change the relationship between the units of measure, which is the actual meaning as far as the type system is concerned. It's just a change of names.
22.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> this is a classic case of not needing more types but needing proper names. Those are types.
23.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> but I don't think e.g. Haskell98 can do it out of the box in an analogous way? This is basically the runtime representation of `data Email = Verified { email :: string } | Unverified { email :: string }`, but promoting `Verified`
24.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> That you introduce more coupling is a tradeoff. That the program (sometimes) gets harder to change is a tradeoff. You don't introduce more coupling, you document the coupling that already exists. If your program is hard to change
25.
by hither_shores 4y ago
> since the shared libs have generics and I'm always casting things. This indicates to me that you're trying to write code that isn't correct (not doesn't work , but rather only works because of implicit couplings be
26.
by hither_shores 4y ago
It was a leveraged buyout
27.
by hither_shores 4y ago
It's about the meaning, not the raw bits. I might be able to duplicate your signature, but that doesn't mean I can sign documents for you.
28.
by hither_shores 4y ago
"an X is just a Y" is a common turn of phrase in mathematical writing. It means that Xs and Ys are the same thing, whereas "an X is a Y" may, depending on context, mean only that every X is a Y. A human is a mammal, but
29.
by hither_shores 4y ago
Journalists don't decide the editorial stance of the publications they write for. In the short term, it's up to an editorial board or editor-in-chief. In the long term, it's up to the owners.
30.
by hither_shores 4y ago
Yes, you (or rather, core library developers) need to pick a data structure appropriate to your access patterns: linked lists for iteration, search trees for concatenation, finger trees for random access, and so on. But you should be doing

More ›