xscott

15 ms·

181.
by xscott 2y ago
I have a pseudo-theory that the universe will never allow quantum physics to provide an answer to a problem where you didn't already know the result from some deterministic means. This will be some bizarre consequence of information t
182.
by xscott 2y ago
What are some good examples? The one a few years ago where Google declared "quantum supremacy" sounded a lot like simulating a noisy circuit by implementing a noisy circuit. And that seems a lot like simulating the falling part
183.
by xscott 2y ago
That just means that the word "breakthrough" has lost it's meaning. I would suggest the word "advancement", but I know this is a losing battle.
184.
by xscott 2y ago
While I'm still eager to see where Quantum Computing leads, I've got a new threshold for "breakthrough": Until a quantum computer can factor products of primes larger than a few bits, I'll consider it a work in pro
185.
by xscott 2y ago
And the part where you only see the list price after you've purchased so you can't shop prices from different provides. And the part where your insurance decides who your allowed providers are. Can you imagine totaling your car,
186.
by xscott 2y ago
We should wrap this up. Saying 2075 or 2110 is the same ridiculous claim as 2049, but I'll pretend you believe it'll save a billion lives to be done with it. Btw, since you're only really interested in winning debates, you p
187.
by xscott 2y ago
It's bad faith unless you really believe that's _plausible_, not some extremely stretched version of _possible_. > Obviously I don't believe that this scenario will literally happen So you don't think that's real
188.
by xscott 2y ago
> no one arguing for it will pretend for a second that the excess stops at stone age level. Thankfully it doesn't even go as far as 250 years ago, when our world was still entirely renewable. Look at the chart. Cement, Iron, and St
189.
by xscott 2y ago
I doubt you believe 2% is going to save billions of lives because of a tipping point in 2049. That's another bad faith argument, but go ahead and ground all the aircraft. No skin off my back. The reason for pointing out insignificant
190.
by xscott 2y ago
My argument is not "everything but airplanes". My petty argument is that this article is stupid, and the bigger point is that focusing on the energy consumption side is a dead end. The problem is that EVERY sector is not very si
191.
by xscott 2y ago
My back of the napkin example chose 50 years because it made the numbers round. Let's pick more relevant numbers. The Paris Climate goals are to keep the increase under 2C, and depending on what IPCC model you believe, it looks like
192.
by xscott 2y ago
Please look at that chart and aggressively pick all the items you're going to add up. Prioritize the difficult choices and make the helpful decisions. Focusing on energy CONSUMPTION is a losing battle, you won't even get to 50%
193.
by xscott 2y ago
I don't think you understood the argument. I rounded up to 2% to give the most possible benefit of the doubt that anything involving airplane flights matters. Do you really think that saving .000024% by getting rid of Bezos and Musk&#
194.
by xscott 2y ago
2% is not a lot. If it takes 50 years of accumulation for things to get bad, saving 2% means it'll be bad in 51 years. And remember, that's for all of the airplanes in all of the world (tens of thousands from commercial alone).
195.
by xscott 2y ago
Please look at this chart: https://ourworldindata.org/ghg-emissions-by-sector It's a few years old, but it shows that ALL of emissions from ALL air transport is less than 2%. From the article: > Musk's [...] je
196.
by xscott 2y ago
I can see where you're coming from, but my intent was to talk about the very first interaction that started all of this nonsense: - I said WebAssembly can already manipulate the DOM with functions. - He asked for an ergonomic example b
197.
by xscott 2y ago
If you picked a language that gave you low level control, and if you had strong opinions about what you wanted, you could probably write that JS library in a weekend or two. Strings and arrays through shared memory. Maybe use a JS Map of
198.
by xscott 2y ago
> And if someone builds a pure tower that goes int32, double, complex, quaternion, do you think that's inherently self-defeating because it can't live up to the promises of a tower? Assuming the obvious implementation of comple
199.
by xscott 2y ago
I'm sorry for misreading your comment about the term "tower". :-) > do you object to using the word "tower" to talk about it No, I don't really care about the terminology, except when it helps to communicat
200.
by xscott 2y ago
> i'd also like to thank you for patiently answering all the questions It's nice of you to say so. Thank you. > can you see what i am getting at here? I mostly can, but I'm not sure we're clear what we're tal
201.
by xscott 2y ago
Are you replying to the correct person(s)? :-) Only the last quote is mine, and I stand by it.
202.
by xscott 2y ago
If it's about career choices, people skills and charisma will get you further than any technical decisions you might make.
203.
by xscott 2y ago
> so does that mean accessing the DOM from python is not possible yet? No. It means you only get what the person who ported CPython or py2wasm gave you. It's not a limitation in WebAssembly, and maybe they have some other (hopeful
204.
by xscott 2y ago
> I thought we established right away that it's not a single tower. Where did we say that? The first picture on the Wikipedia page shows the tower as a linear stack of items from set theory. The Scheme predicates are named similar
205.
by xscott 2y ago
> how would the example look like when written in python for example? That seems like an easy question, but there a lot of choices which complicate it. I'm sure people have compiled CPython to WebAssembly, but I think you only get
206.
by xscott 2y ago
From a distance, I kind of like Scheme, so I went and re-read the R5RS section on the topic. To me, the numeric tower (generalized) says: N < Z < Q < R < C < H ℕ ⊂ ℤ ⊂ ℚ ⊂ ℝ ⊂ ℂ ⊂ ℍ That's a nice statement a
207.
by xscott 2y ago
Yeah, I've never used Postscript except as a document format created by LaTeX :-) There was a language called "V" a while back, different than a more recent language called V. It was basically a Forth where quoting was done
208.
by xscott 2y ago
I wonder what the response would've been if I had left the WAT source code out and just claimed, "this WASM binary was built with a compiler", and not specified the language.
209.
by xscott 2y ago
I think I can summarize your point of view as, "any use of floats should be treated as undefined behavior, so you get what you deserve." And that says nothing about whether implicit conversions are a good idea or not.
210.
by xscott 2y ago
I wasn't trying to draw attention to comparisons for equality. Perhaps I should've used an arrow => instead of == to indicate "the result of this operation", but that probably would've caused confusion too... Th

More ›