

That is a pretty lame “poisoning”.


That is a pretty lame “poisoning”.


This also makes me realize that I sometimes enunciate “the” unvoiced.
Well now you’ve seen it elsewhere, too.
distributing relay knowledge among chatters (TBD)
This is the core reason that centralization is currently necessary. So admitting that it’s an unsolved problem for a federated alternative is basically reinforcing Signal’s point.
That’s because you haven’t unlearned it yet


Two, arguably: one with Apple and one with upstream Linux.
String escaping sucks in bash and other posix-style shells too, though.
But that’s not actually true in general; there is a default branch concept in forges, and an integration and/or release branch in most recommended workflows. That’s the trunk.


Fair, but it’s one that the typical tools for finding bugs, tests and static analysis, cannot actually help with.


Desktop Linux is still an extremely niche userbase, even with SteamOS and Microsoft doing its absolute best to aggravate users.


🤖 Reality Check #1 20/20 🔥 Perfect Streak: 20
…some of those looked much more impressive than I expected, though.
Believe me, whitespace-correct scripting is absolutely an issue.
You’re right that it’s annoying when filenames diverge right at a character that must be escaped.
For interactive use, tab-completion essentially makes this a non-issue, because shells add escaping in the appropriate places.
For scripting, where spaces are harder to deal with, unfortunately there’s just not much you can do; your two options are basically to learn all of your particular shell’s patterns for dealing with whitespace in filenames, or only write scripts in something other than a POSIX shell.


Here it is:
Presumably, it already used SIMD, and that’s how the existing GNU utility beat Rust by a factor of 17x.


Presumably, it already used SIMD, and that’s how the existing GNU utility beat Rust by a factor of 17x.
That’s fair; Python, Swift, and most Lisps all use or have previously used reference-counting. But the quoted sentence isn’t wrong, since it said no “garbage collection pauses” rather than “garbage collection.”
“Garbage collection” is ambiguous, actually; reference counting is traditionally considered a kind of “garbage collection”. The type you’re thinking of is called “tracing garbage collection,” but the term “garbage collection” is often used to specifically mean “tracing garbage collection.”
What’s wrong with the explanation given?
…the rest of it explains the context, and then briefly says that some people will disagree with the decision, but those people should just use a different distro. What are you complaining about?
Thanks for sharing this! I really think that when people see LLM failures and say that such failures demonstrate how fundamentally different LLMs are from human cognition, they tend to overlook how humans actually do exhibit remarkably similar failures modes. Obviously dementia isn’t really analogous to generating text while lacking the ability to “see” a rendering based on that text. But it’s still pretty interesting that whatever feedback loops did get corrupted in these patients led to such a variety of failure modes.
As an example of what I’m talking about, I appreciated and generally agreed with this recent Octomind post, but I disagree with the list of problems that “wouldn’t trip up a human dev”; these are all things I’ve seen real humans do, or could imagine a human doing.