kilgnad

34 ms·

331.
by kilgnad 4y ago
I agree with the imperative, oop and functional part. The declarative part is just stretching it. It's like saying using chatGPT to write your code is just a form of state management. Technically yes, but this viewpoint is overly pedan
332.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Here's what chatGPT has to say to you: ME: Someone on hackernews says you can't write code or craft essays or lie. Explain to him how he's wrong. chatGPT: As an AI language model, I am capable of generating text tha
333.
by kilgnad 4y ago
I work with people who directly train LLMs. I can assure you if you think these things are probability machines, you have not played with it thoroughly. Alexa or cortana or even GPT-3 are more like probability generators. ChatGPT is differe
334.
by kilgnad 4y ago
>AGI is always coming "in a decade or so" since the 70s This whole thing is no longer relevant because we just hit certain inflection points that weren't relevant in the past. AI can now code, it can craft essays and it ca
335.
by kilgnad 4y ago
I expect Gen-5 to produce something similar to Avatar 2 from this sentence: "Blue people in science fiction film"... Or maybe you just feed it all the movies as input: Avatar 1 and Avatar 2 and it makes an Avatar 3. Truly we are w
336.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Domain knowledge can shift but not always. npm and javascript are around to stay. Same with most of the linux API. It is true that the fundamentals that SICP teaches will be around forever, but the fact of the matter is, if I'm an empl
337.
by kilgnad 4y ago
As if the techniques in SICP was the only way to build those black boxes? Do you honestly think someone who just learns python really well without touching SICP can't build a library? They can. It's just they can't build the
338.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Your reading too much into it. Literally they taught the SAME course for 10 years after he left? That action doesn't even MESH with your logic. MIT wand the admin WANTED to continue SICP. It's Sussman who wanted to stop.
339.
by kilgnad 4y ago
How so? Care to elaborate on how you know this? Personally I've definitely heard arguments from both sides, but I've never known which one was "more" true.
340.
by kilgnad 4y ago
As I said I'm making no commentary about government and corpos in general. I'm saying something specific to the CIA and NSA.
341.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Not necessarily more trust for a corporation by virtue of the corporation not being government. I have less trust for the NSA and CIA because of past infractions. For example how the CIA was selling coke to the US to fund their programs. Th
342.
by kilgnad 4y ago
This line of work is all about dishonesty. Espionage and spying and dishonesty is the job description. They can't know. Also I would argue people in the NSA are less honest then normal despite the background checks.
343.
by kilgnad 4y ago
I don't disagree. Not sure who is voting you down.
344.
by kilgnad 4y ago
10 years?? How would they know?
345.
by kilgnad 4y ago
I don't think most people (programmers included) followed it in detail as closely as you. Care to elaborate on Snowden's misunderstanding or prism?
346.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Well Google doesn't write shit like stuxnet. I don't know for sure but I'm pretty sure Google employees can't directly look at user details? For the NSA I'm sure you'll literally be able to look up personal det
347.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Because palantir can lay you off. Also the scope of the NSA is much more broad and you'll also have the possibility to work on stuff that could be closer to ops stuff as well. For example I don't think palantir works on shit like
348.
by kilgnad 4y ago
You'd have to be ok with doing a lot of f-ed up shit working for the NSA. Enough shit to cause someone like Snowden to Exile himself as a whistleblower. There is no-doubt in my mind a lot of those programs are still running and new one
349.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Tax dollars. These jobs are safe from layoffs. It looks really bad when the government starts laying off people.
350.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Majority of drivers don't need to understand physics to drive. It doesn't help. Instead humans rely on visual intuition, which everyone has with or without learning physics.
351.
by kilgnad 4y ago
No watch the video. He quit and then the head of the department ended up teaching it for 10 more years. The department did not force him out or force him to change. I know tons of great things can be done without libraries. But logically sp
352.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Mozilla's mission wasn't to conduct charity to the point of self annihilation which is what would've occured had they not spun off the rust division. Non-profits cannot sustain themselves without positive cash flow. Just look
353.
by kilgnad 4y ago
>The point about engineering is that there's no movement saying that engineers should stop studying physics, and consume physics knowledge in special packets prepared for the use of the "engineering industry" by physicists
354.
by kilgnad 4y ago
>Sussman is not praising the experimental approach, where you need to probe your libraries like a science experiment before you can use them, where now you need to do science before you can do science, he is mocking it. He neither praise
355.
by kilgnad 4y ago
>First of all, pilots absolutely do know how airplanes work, and they make you study the aerodynamics and pass a course before you get your first hour of flight time, even as a student going up. But they can't build an airplane. Thi
356.
by kilgnad 4y ago
>SICP is about abstraction, that's where the book starts. abstraction is a simple concept. Everyone understands it. SICP goes deeper then that but it doesn't explicitly say it. What sicp is about is abstraction from the ground
357.
by kilgnad 4y ago
Bro, let's say the world embraced FP and it was the dominant paradigm and the techniques and patterns of SICP were taught in EVERY computer science curriculum. The change Sussman described that happened in engineering WILL STILL occur.
358.
by kilgnad 4y ago
You wouldn't be able to reply to me if it wasn't a good idea. The amount of software just to transmit your words to me and others is already too complex for anyone to completely understand. It's not just software most of the
359.
by kilgnad 4y ago
OpenReplacement is probably a more fitting name for the future. Don't want to be stuck with an outmoded name when the project evolves into something else. Sure it can start out as an assistant, in 10 years it will replace you at your j
360.
by kilgnad 4y ago
I mean is the standard wisdom wrong? The standard wisdom is right. The way I see it is this. Sicp is good to know. But as an introduction to programming python and applications are more relevant to the modern age. >As far as I know, engi

More ›