rerdavies

7 ms·

91.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
Good catch. One has to wonder how many private non-profit entities there are in the world that want to build a "pilot manufacturing and testing" plant, that - Are able to put up $5m of their own money in order to receive $25m. - A
92.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
Ledbetter actually implicitly reveals why the pilot episode was so off, interestingly. First off, he wasn't working in the industry at the time the pilot episode takes place. He first got involved in the industry a couple of years late
93.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
The original printing of the King James Bible had copyright protection (and still does, in the UK). 1611.
94.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
It is TOTALLY a stupid question, because OBVIOUSLY you should drive. It is based on the false premise that there is actually a choice. If somebody were to sincerely ask me this question, actually believing that walking was an option, I&#x27
95.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
And the corollary: if LLMs were truly intelligent, they would also be able to respond to such questions sarcastically.
96.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
An interesting parallel to that is the "What's the next number in this sequence?" sort of questions. If four numbers are provided, one can calculate the coefficients of a a quartic polynomial, for x values of 0, 1, 2 and 3, a
97.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
A supplementary results that's also fascinating: that when you switch the order of provided context, every model I tried gave the correct answer. The car wash is 50m away. I want to wash my car. Should I drive or walk.
98.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
This is something I have wondered about before: whether AIs are more likely to give wrong answers when you ask a stupid question instead of a sensible one. Speaking personally, I often cannot resist the temptation to give reductio-ad-absurd
99.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
Have you actually seriously tried using an AI? It really isn't that hard to get good code with less effort using an AI. Just manage the scope of the tasks you give it. And of course, review the code that it generates. And of course, do
100.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
Excellent example. I do actually remember that part as being particularly cringeworthy. The IBM PC Technical Reference Manual also included complete schematics for the motherboard as well. And, as an added bonus, as a hardware guy would kno
101.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
As someone who lived through that era, I couldn't watch it. A deep sense of uncanny valley. The 97% that they got completely right was ruined by the 3% that that they got wildly wrong. Often senslessly so. Stuff that a technical consul
102.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
Sure. That's an interesting example. Does the cost of the extra instructions completely disappear in an 11 cycle branch stall that occurs when the ret instruction executes? Maybe. Or perhaps the pipeline is able to pre-fetch the return
103.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
Eye-watering perhaps, but not unreasonably for what you got. Although the top-tier Enterprise editions truly were eye-wateringly expensive, and provided nothing compellingly useful that wasn't available in entry-level or mid-tier MSDN
104.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
Sure, the code is strange, but it is not necessarily inefficient. The only way to determine whether it is inefficient is to profile the generated code. And perhaps, compare the performance of compiler-generated code with tweaked or hand-gen
105.
by rerdavies 8mo ago
Not really sure that a type system is going to guarantee that your program generates the correct result for every possible input.
106.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
Working for me, but very very slow to load (which I assume is most of the way to 403).
107.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
Presumably with the rather unpleasant side-effect of compiles that may never finish. :-P
108.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
... for some spectactularly inconsistent and arbitrary definition of "correct program".
109.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
Not getting it. Why would you want to do this? And why is no distinction made between `typeof(type)` and `type`? And doesn't the entire problem go away if you distinguish between `typeof(type)`, which is a value whose type is `type`?
110.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
4800kHz and 44100kHz devices appeared at roughly the same time. Sony's first 44100kHz device was shipped in 1979. Phillips wanted to use 44.0kHz. If you can do 44.1khz on an NSTC recording device, you can do 44.0khz too. Neither NTSC d
111.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
What's new is that they WANT to revert to the horror of XML. :-P
112.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
The principle difference, IMHO, is that it makes the security visible. My home cable router has NO firewall configuration at all. Supplied by my ISP and woefully deficient in absolutely all respects. I can't (for example) configure It
113.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
Pretty darned good at C++ and typescript too.
114.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
I am a (very) senior dev with decades of experience. And I, too, am blown away by the massive productivity gains I get from the use of coding AIs. Part of the craft of being a good developer is keeping up with current technology. I can&#x27
115.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
It seems more of a cultural issue that -- I'm pretty sure -- predates Microsoft's acquisition of GitHub. I assume crappy proprietary yaml can be blamed on use of Ruby. And there seems to be an odd and pervasive "80% is good e
116.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
If you're building for Windows, then bash is "just no", so it's either cmd/.bat, or pwsh/.ps. <shrugs>
117.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
What would you consider evidence? Emails between standards committee members agreeing to collude in order to screw pro-audio customers? The evidence is: why on earth would anyone on a standards committee choose 44.1kHz, instead of 44.0kHz?
118.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
But they CAN practically avoid it. lol. Just let the system do it for them.
119.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
> Why do we have both 48kHz and 44.1kHz anyway Because of greed. Early audio manufacturers (SONY notably) used 48kHz for profession-grade audio equipment, that would be used in studios or TV stations, and degraded 44.1khz audio for consu
120.
by rerdavies 9mo ago
Depends on platform. But yes. It is also the job of the operating system or its supporting parts to allow applications to configure audio devices to specific sample rates if that's what the application needs. It's fine to just tak

More ›