zephen

10 ms·

181.
by zephen 5mo ago
Ibogaine may or may not work. Iocane powder usually effects a complete cure.
182.
by zephen 5mo ago
Still no introspection; that sentiment is obviously directed outward.
183.
by zephen 5mo ago
The article veers from saying computers are different, to saying they should be different but maybe aren't, back to how special they are: > The next time you sit down to an empty design doc and don’t know where to start, be kind to
184.
by zephen 5mo ago
It is certainly unsurprising that one who presumes to know all about others would take a small data point and use it to confirm the correctness of their presumptions, rather than to consider any sort of introspection. You do you.
185.
by zephen 5mo ago
Maybe. I have 7 lines with unlimited data for under $150.
186.
by zephen 5mo ago
So far, I have only found this with T-Mobile's app. The good news is that I can go into the nearby T-Mobile store and have them deal with it.
187.
by zephen 5mo ago
Joke's on the server. The robot that will replace their job soon will be more than happy to regale you with any hallucinated information you would like about the subtleties of the menu.
188.
by zephen 5mo ago
Some tested samples had mercury. Others, formic acid. Neither one great to inhale. https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2025-09/CY%202023%20...
189.
by zephen 5mo ago
> One path is certainly examining the sample, which is largely discussed in the article by looking at ratios of isomers. The trend is for the unwanted L-isomer to be mostly eliminated. That doesn't really let you know the process.
190.
by zephen 5mo ago
Yes, if there are multiplicative effects from the different disruptors, that could certainly have a large effect.
191.
by zephen 5mo ago
It's certainly possible to write optimizations that generate nondeterministic llvm outputs, but the docs explain conditions when that can happen, and warn against it.
192.
by zephen 5mo ago
> the only thing society is really good at with regards to drugs is prohibition. Really? Seems to me that, in general, we suck at it.
193.
by zephen 5mo ago
Right? One suspects that "knowing how it was made" implies "understanding contaminants to look for."
194.
by zephen 5mo ago
The article was doing so well until the conclusion. > Does this rule out the idea of contaminants? No. Even if it’s 97% pure d-meth, there could be something very nasty lurking in that last 3%. But I don’t see the need for such an explan
195.
by zephen 5mo ago
> People who are keen on contributing to open source will do it even with AI, and people who are not wouldn't do it anyway. People are not a monolith and, for example, you have zero fucking clue about my motivations.
196.
by zephen 5mo ago
> And you're surprised OSS projects are pivoting towards "open source does not mean open contributions"? How do you get that from: > the risk is that people who don't understand the projects just point scanners at
197.
by zephen 5mo ago
Don't think you even need to qualify that with "llvm generated."
198.
by zephen 5mo ago
Before WASM was the CLR. Before the CLR was the JVM. Before the JVM was the Smalltalk VM. Before the Smalltalk VM was the Pascal P-Machine. Before the Pascal P-Machine was the BCPL O-Code interpreter.
199.
by zephen 5mo ago
As if someone vibe-coding it has that insanely deep knowledge?
200.
by zephen 5mo ago
Millions of people do this thing that we know about and brag about and don't discourage because it makes us a metric shitton of money == ringing fucking endorsement, fuck yeah!
201.
by zephen 5mo ago
> I think many developers are productive in one language: in the one that they know best. While superficially true, this conflates cause and effect. I am, or was at one time, extremely proficient in multiple assembly languages, Fortran,
202.
by zephen 5mo ago
It sure as shit wasn't advertised as a new-age alternative to The Onion.
203.
by zephen 5mo ago
There's the syntax, of course. But then there's also the semantics. When something that looks like Python parameter passing actually passes a copy of the argument, it's not really Python at all. What's even more inter
204.
by zephen 5mo ago
I really wanted to like Mojo, but the more I read about it, the more it really wasn't Python even though, starting out, that was a major claim to fame. There is an excellent chance it will be awesome stuff. But they did themselves a h
205.
by zephen 5mo ago
A model, given exactly the same inputs, will return exactly the same outputs. But your prompts are not the only inputs. Among other things, there is a random seed injected by the vendor. That is a primary source of non-determinism. Then, o
206.
by zephen 5mo ago
> What I've seen is that if you define the architectural constraints, the agent writes complex, unmaintainable code... To be fair, there are many people like this as well. One of my personal favorite examples was way back in the 80
207.
by zephen 5mo ago
Even pre-AI, when working with slop generated by other humans, starting with something was often better than staring at a blank screen.
208.
by zephen 5mo ago
Or even whether you need a destructor, or something simpler, like nulling out a pointer or two to break a reference loop. defer is a perfectly general structured flow concept; it only cares about when you do something, and is completely o
209.
by zephen 5mo ago
> When you explicitly invoke a "destructor", you do it on many code paths (and miss one or two) Unless, of course, you do it inside a defer block. > You don't specify where the `defer`-red "destructor" will be
210.
by zephen 6mo ago
But he was just working along and someone else outed his branch, right? Dude doesn't owe you any sort of explanation.

More ›