millimeterman

15 ms·

91.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Even this commonly parroted "fact" isn't true. Cambridge Analytica exploited a Facebook misfeature that let them scrape a frankly ridiculous amount of data from users who took their quiz thing. Certainly Facebook shouldn&#x27
92.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Let's be real - Successor ML is never happening. I just don't think there's enough interest.
93.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Just some examples: - First-class modules don't feel very first class, with how clunky it is to use modules at the value level - Records are very clunky and hacky to use - Generative functors are a hack - Special language-level equalit
94.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Here is a StackExchange post: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2453533/triple-nega...
95.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Oops, good catch.
96.
by millimeterman 6y ago
A simple diagonalization argument is perfectly constructive.
97.
by millimeterman 6y ago
I'm not familiar with this specific proof, but reading the description it sounds perfectly constructive. A true proof by contradiction would be "Assume [0, 1] is not uncountable. That leads to a contradiction, so [0, 1] is not not
98.
by millimeterman 6y ago
I don't know if I'd call OCaml dead simple. It's full of inconsistencies and bolted-on features that are practically useful but definitely not simple or elegantly designed. It's kind of like the C++ of ML derivatives in
99.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Not at all - that kind of dataflow analysis is basically just a hack to patch over the fundamentally broken design of having everything be nullable. It's totally unnecessary in a language with proper algebraic data types where there&#x
100.
by millimeterman 6y ago
I don't know anything about mercurial's internal data model, so it's hard to say. In particular, it makes some fundamentally different choices (e.g. no staging area, the ability to use unnamed branches). I certainly think git
101.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Strong disagree. Software quality is driven almost entirely by either insane dedication from hobbyists or (more commonly) monetary incentives. Lots of businesses depend on Postgres so it's good. Github makes money off of providing a go
102.
by millimeterman 6y ago
I mean, modern websites do a lot more than display documents. They're certainly bloated, but they increasingly need to "do everything." Normal people do so much of their computer usage in the browser that it could probably _b
103.
by millimeterman 6y ago
I mean, that problem is hardly common and Windows is definitely full of similar bugs. And I'm not sure it's possible to make web browsers much simpler without losing functionality - the websites they have to support necessitate th
104.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Inbox may have been a good concept but the actual software was horrible. The site took ages to load and was painfully slow.
105.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Not OP, but I prefer the paradigm of phabricator diffs over GitHub PRs. It papers over git's inability to have unnamed branches and makes stacked diffs much easier. It also makes it easier to do "no branches, everything is on mast
106.
by millimeterman 6y ago
I disagree about Chrome. It's absolutely not perfect, but considering its sheer complexity - browsers are probably comparable to an operating system at this point - bugs are fairly rare and performance is quite good.
107.
by millimeterman 6y ago
I think the best argument against git is to use mercurial for a few months. It has exactly the same functionality but a nicer and more streamlined interface, especially when it comes to branch management.
108.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Emacs is just the VSCode of yesteryear - there's a reason people used to joke about "emacs" standing for "emacs makes a computer slow".
109.
by millimeterman 6y ago
While Homebrew is absolutely slow, the experience of package management on macOS (homebrew gets you bleeding-edge versions of the crap you install, whereas Apple manages the system and keeps it stable) is IMO better than Linux where the cho
110.
by millimeterman 6y ago
I use SteerMouse. It lets you customize mouse speed/acceleration, remap all your buttons, and set up mouse chords. It's admittedly paid and it's stupid that you should need to pay for functionality like this, but it's us
111.
by millimeterman 6y ago
> I can buy a USD1k+ device and still not be able to install on it the apps I want because the manufacturer doesn't want me to Yes. Good. Sure it might benefit you and me, but Apple is designing their devices for normal people. Norm
112.
by millimeterman 6y ago
The fact that this is unpopular convinces me that most HN posters don't work on real commercial products. Or if they do, then I don't care to use the products they develop.
113.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Counterpoint: OSS usually lacks polish and only works well if your workflow is sufficiently similar to the developers' workflow. Linux is great if all you're doing is developing software with popular tools/languages, but if y
114.
by millimeterman 6y ago
You say this as if Atom is some sort of widely used standard. Atom and VSCode are just two players in a wide ecosystem of editors and IDEs, most of which Microsoft has no control over. And I'd bet that most people using other tools (e.
115.
by millimeterman 6y ago
While true, this isn't a free get out of jail card whenever someone brings up slow compilation. OCaml's compiler is blazing fast.
116.
by millimeterman 6y ago
> Nowadays, the Haskell IDE engine is good enough for general use. It's pretty trivial to plug into every general-purpose editor. Strong disagree. Even in small hobby projects it's slow, has limited functionality, and needs fre
117.
by millimeterman 6y ago
IMO stuff like <$> and >>= are fine. They're part of the standard library and are very widely used so you just learn them once. The real problem is when random libraries invent so many symbolic operators that they become th
118.
by millimeterman 6y ago
Haskell certainly has a _better_ parallelism story than OCaml but I wouldn't call it great. It's really nothing special.
119.
by millimeterman 6y ago
We'll have to wait and see how finished coroutines implementations perform, but I'm leery of the fact that sidestepping heap allocation relies on compiler optimizations. Optimizers can be fickle and in a language like C++/Rus
120.
by millimeterman 6y ago
I'd actually point the finger at Java itself, though I imagine the editor didn't help. Java's type system is (IMO) about as cumbersome and unhelpful as they come. A good type system should be minimally obtrusive while prevent

More ›