> The objections to non-profits, OSFs, education, healthcare, and small companies all boil down to: they don't pay enough or they're inconvenient. Those are valid personal reasons, but not moral justifications. You…
> you need some insane mental gymnastics Perhaps. I dislike google (have disliked it for many years with varying intensity), but they have done stuff where I've been compelled to say "neat". Hence "mixed bag". This "new…
> non-profits I think those are pretty problematic. They can't pay well (no profits...), and/or they may be politically motivated such that working for them would mean a worse compromise. > open source foundations Those…
> We all are slaves to capitalism Yes, but informedly choosing your slavedriver still has merit. > Extrem fast and massive automatisation around the globe might be the only think pushing us close enough to the edge that…
For those of us who consider programming a way to self-realize, the potential vanishing of programming as a lucrative job definitely seems threatening. However, I don't think it could disappear entirely. Professions…
> You either surf this wave or get drowned by it I don't think so. Handcrafted everything and organic everything continue to exist; there is demand for them. "Being relegated to a niche" is entirely possible, and that's…
> I still glue everything else together myself. This is the core difference. Just "gluing things together" satisfies you. It's unacceptable to me. You don't want to own your code at the level that I want to own mine at.
> Not all of AI is consumer LLM chatbots And as long as that used to be the case, not many people revolted.
I've tested the "emerging new thing", and it's utter trash.
yeah, me too: > while maintaining perfect awareness "awareness" my ass. Awful.
> Criticizing anthropomorphic language is lazy, unconsidered, and juvenile. To the contrary, it's one of the most important criticisms against AI (and its masters). The same criticism applies to a broader set of topics,…
> AI makes people feel icky Yes! > it’s important for us to understand why we actually like or dislike something Yes! The primary reason we hate AI with a passion is that the companies behind it intentionally keep…
... not to mention that most of the time, what AI produces is unmitigated slop and factual mistakes, deliberately coated in dopamine-infusing brown-nosing. I refuse for my position, even profession, to be debased to AI…
Others in the thread seem to be saying that he has retired (sort of) a few years ago.
Can you elaborate on the "all parts of an experience are valid" part? I may be missing something. Thanks.
> We’ve been compromising on those morals for our whole career Yes! > The needle moved just a little bit That's where we disagree.
Don't be ridiculous. Google has been doing many things, some of those even nearly good. The super talented/prolific/capable have always gravitated to powerful maecenases. (This applies to Haydn and Händel, too.) If you…
... not to mention the time it takes to load directory entries and inodes when the cache is cold.
motif apps? xmag? xfontsel? forwarding over ssh? ~/.XCompose? "links2 -g"?
Vector Clocks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamport_timestamp
I find the repeated "yolo" qualifications very tiresome, yawn-inducing. At least in this article: https://fil-c.org/runtime the term "classic C" is still used. I don't expect for a moment that Fil-C might supplant…
Thanks!
Thanks for the answer. I disagree because I've seen closures shine (in OCaml) and suck terribly (in C++). Same concept, extremely different programming experience and debuggability. Syntax matters, language psychology…
return in_reverse? (right > left) - (right < left) : (left > right) - (left < right); I prefer (with "greater" being ±1, defaulting to +1): return left < right ? -greater : left > right ? greater : 0;
From the introduction, your paper seems like a counterproposal: support closures, just not the way others propose. But the paper seems to accept that closures / nested functions, supported at the language level…
> The objections to non-profits, OSFs, education, healthcare, and small companies all boil down to: they don't pay enough or they're inconvenient. Those are valid personal reasons, but not moral justifications. You…
> you need some insane mental gymnastics Perhaps. I dislike google (have disliked it for many years with varying intensity), but they have done stuff where I've been compelled to say "neat". Hence "mixed bag". This "new…
> non-profits I think those are pretty problematic. They can't pay well (no profits...), and/or they may be politically motivated such that working for them would mean a worse compromise. > open source foundations Those…
> We all are slaves to capitalism Yes, but informedly choosing your slavedriver still has merit. > Extrem fast and massive automatisation around the globe might be the only think pushing us close enough to the edge that…
For those of us who consider programming a way to self-realize, the potential vanishing of programming as a lucrative job definitely seems threatening. However, I don't think it could disappear entirely. Professions…
> You either surf this wave or get drowned by it I don't think so. Handcrafted everything and organic everything continue to exist; there is demand for them. "Being relegated to a niche" is entirely possible, and that's…
> I still glue everything else together myself. This is the core difference. Just "gluing things together" satisfies you. It's unacceptable to me. You don't want to own your code at the level that I want to own mine at.
> Not all of AI is consumer LLM chatbots And as long as that used to be the case, not many people revolted.
I've tested the "emerging new thing", and it's utter trash.
yeah, me too: > while maintaining perfect awareness "awareness" my ass. Awful.
> Criticizing anthropomorphic language is lazy, unconsidered, and juvenile. To the contrary, it's one of the most important criticisms against AI (and its masters). The same criticism applies to a broader set of topics,…
> AI makes people feel icky Yes! > it’s important for us to understand why we actually like or dislike something Yes! The primary reason we hate AI with a passion is that the companies behind it intentionally keep…
... not to mention that most of the time, what AI produces is unmitigated slop and factual mistakes, deliberately coated in dopamine-infusing brown-nosing. I refuse for my position, even profession, to be debased to AI…
Others in the thread seem to be saying that he has retired (sort of) a few years ago.
Can you elaborate on the "all parts of an experience are valid" part? I may be missing something. Thanks.
> We’ve been compromising on those morals for our whole career Yes! > The needle moved just a little bit That's where we disagree.
Don't be ridiculous. Google has been doing many things, some of those even nearly good. The super talented/prolific/capable have always gravitated to powerful maecenases. (This applies to Haydn and Händel, too.) If you…
... not to mention the time it takes to load directory entries and inodes when the cache is cold.
motif apps? xmag? xfontsel? forwarding over ssh? ~/.XCompose? "links2 -g"?
Vector Clocks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamport_timestamp
I find the repeated "yolo" qualifications very tiresome, yawn-inducing. At least in this article: https://fil-c.org/runtime the term "classic C" is still used. I don't expect for a moment that Fil-C might supplant…
Thanks!
Thanks for the answer. I disagree because I've seen closures shine (in OCaml) and suck terribly (in C++). Same concept, extremely different programming experience and debuggability. Syntax matters, language psychology…
return in_reverse? (right > left) - (right < left) : (left > right) - (left < right); I prefer (with "greater" being ±1, defaulting to +1): return left < right ? -greater : left > right ? greater : 0;
From the introduction, your paper seems like a counterproposal: support closures, just not the way others propose. But the paper seems to accept that closures / nested functions, supported at the language level…