jiriknesl (u/jiriknesl)

jiriknesl commented on Choosing a language based on its syntax? gingerbill.org/article/20... · Posted by u/todsacerdoti

gingerBill · 19 days ago

The article does no such thing and just focused on declaration syntaxes and semicolons. I can class literally any language into the three categories for declaring variables.

* Haskells are name-focused languages. * Smalltalk is a name-focused language. * LISPs are qualifier-focused languages.

I think you might have a blinkered viewpoint in how you have interpreted the article.

jiriknesl · 17 days ago

I think you oversimplify things a bit.

Are those names erased during compilation? It has a massive impact.

If you have indirect calls, how are those resolved? That matters a lot.

What is even the language, after the code is compiled/interpreted. Does it disappear like in many languages? Do you have some parts available, but not all (like in PHP)? Or do you have full runtime at hand and you can mold it like in Smalltalk? There are languages with no runtime, languages with some runtime, and languages with full image in place. Each has massively different pros and cons.

When you say Haskell and Smalltalk are name focused, you are technically right, but developer experience is extremely different.

jiriknesl commented on Choosing a language based on its syntax? gingerbill.org/article/20... · Posted by u/todsacerdoti

jiriknesl · 22 days ago

I don't want to be overly negative, but it seems to me that author considers just different flavours of C.

There is a massive difference between Clojure, Prolog, and Forth.

The whole:

    type name = value—type-focused
    name: type = value—name-focused
    var name type = value—qualifier-focused

Is so much deep into details of how syntax might look like.

If you are choosing between Kotlin and Go, it is for the platform, not the syntax. If you decide between Haskell, Idris, Scheme, you do it with the syntax in mind.

jiriknesl commented on Have Taken Up Farming dylan.gr/1768295794... · Posted by u/djnaraps

ironbound · 2 months ago

So they hit a mid-life crisis, and rather then take small steps they read the bible and move to an island to start farming, I wish them luck.

jiriknesl · 2 months ago

I guess, these things are long somewhere in the mind, before people execute.

People change countries, partners, careers not because of one book. This is usually the last drop. They were long-term unhappy, yearning for something else.

And as this guy wrote, he was sick, he was burned out. I suppose, he wasn't able to limit his screen time, it was all or nothing. Sometimes, those big changes work better than incremental steps. 20 years ago, I went from a pack of cigarettes a day to zero. If I went to 19, then 18, then 17, I might still smoke to this day.

jiriknesl commented on Just 0.001% hold 3 times the wealth of poorest half of humanity, report finds theguardian.com/inequalit... · Posted by u/robtherobber

jiriknesl · 3 months ago

As always, it takes into account only a subset of what constitutes wealth.

The state owns national parks, army equipment, buildings... Also, the state owns an impact on regulated companies, subsidies, etc.

Just the US army receives funding about $1 trillion a year. It must own equipment, weapons, and buildings in a value of many trillions.

Every single citizen has a share in all of what the state owns and controls. The state also partially controls the wealth of billionaires.

So I suppose, that the top 0.001% holds as much value as... the bottom 5%?

jiriknesl commented on Ilya Sutskever: We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research dwarkesh.com/p/ilya-sutsk... · Posted by u/piotrgrabowski

joelthelion · 4 months ago

> When do you expect that impact? I think the models seem smarter than their economic impact would imply.

> Yeah. This is one of the very confusing things about the models right now.

As someone who's been integrating "AI" and algorithms into people's workflows for twenty years, the answer is actually simple. It takes time to figure out how exactly to use these tools, and integrate them into existing tooling and workflows.

Even if the models don't get any smarter, just give it a few more years and we'll see a strong impact. We're just starting to figure things out.

jiriknesl · 4 months ago

Oh yes, this is 100% accurate.

Very often, when designing ERP, or other system, people think: "This is easy, I just this XYZ I am done." Then, you find that there are many corner use-cases. XYZ can be split to phases, you might need to add approvals, logging, data integrations... and what was a simple task, becomes 10 tasks.

In the first year of CompSci uni, our teacher told us a thing I remember: Every system is 90% finished 90% of time. He was right.

jiriknesl commented on YouTube's new anti-adblock measures iter.ca/post/yt-adblock/... · Posted by u/smitop

sodality2 · 9 months ago

> By accepting ToS, or using service with ToS, you are entering a legal contract

Half right. Only if I accept them affirmatively with a clickwrap, like your article mentions. Implicitly accepted ones do not count. I’m not signed into youtube.com, so there is no acceptance of ToS.

jiriknesl · 9 months ago

Even browse-wrap is legally binding, if visible enough (and it is visible just under the confirmation button on that massive Cookie Acceptance modal dialog when you come to YouTube).

jiriknesl commented on YouTube's new anti-adblock measures iter.ca/post/yt-adblock/... · Posted by u/smitop

asadotzler · 9 months ago

No, you didn't make that agreement.

TOS is a NOTICE, not a contract.

There's zero agreement happening when you visit a website.

Assuming you didn't do something actually illegal while using their service, without a contract the most they can do is ban you from the service, or try to.

jiriknesl · 9 months ago

It is legally binding. By accepting ToS, or using service with ToS, you are entering a legal contract. And as long as ToS isn't breaking laws (like Digital Services Act in EU, or Online Safety Act in the UK) it can be fully enforced.

Here is an example of ToS being enforced: https://kennedyslaw.com/en/thought-leadership/article/2023/n...

Another example https://www.internetlibrary.com/cases/lib_case392.cfm

jiriknesl commented on YouTube's new anti-adblock measures iter.ca/post/yt-adblock/... · Posted by u/smitop

sodality2 · 9 months ago

Terms of service aren't legally binding. Theft is of course illegal.

jiriknesl · 9 months ago

It is legally binding. By accepting ToS, or using service with ToS, you are entering a legal contract. And as long as ToS isn't breaking laws (like Digital Services Act in EU, or Online Safety Act in the UK) it can be fully enforced.

Here is an example of ToS being enforced: https://kennedyslaw.com/en/thought-leadership/article/2023/n...

jiriknesl commented on Successful people set constraints rather than chasing goals joanwestenberg.com/smart-... · Posted by u/MaysonL

IAmBroom · 9 months ago

Religion can fall in this category.

The Taliban shows it is not always thus. Nothing is that simple.

jiriknesl · 9 months ago

If you look for examples of something good, or something bad, you will always find them.

I think, when we look at all social phenomenons, we need to look on the whole system. What is the role of religion? When religion is not there, what fits the hole? (Nowadays, there are many non-religion religions like consumerism, extreme-individualism, or global warming; all of those have their own prophets, the story of fight between good and evil, rituals, inherent sin and a way to 'buy out' out of that sin)

jiriknesl commented on Successful people set constraints rather than chasing goals joanwestenberg.com/smart-... · Posted by u/MaysonL

grafmax · 9 months ago

These are merely correlational studies. Religion often makes people’s lives worse as well: sexual repression, homophobia, religious intolerance, fear of eternal damnation, misplaced guilt/shame, hours wasted on prayer/services/rituals, sheltered upbringings..

I think the underlying issue is whether a person views the objective appraisal of reality as a positive thing or not. For someone who doesn’t, self-deception may seem the better choice.

jiriknesl · 9 months ago

Sorry for a super late answer.

The reason those studies are just correlational, is because in social sciences, you don't really have many other tools.

There are no axioms, deduction is impossible. So that part of the argument is not really all that much valid. You have no mechanism to make social sciences more exact.

--

Yes, there are also negative outcomes. But positive ones are stronger than the negative ones.

And also, some of your examples are not negative at all. The point of fear of damnation for example is the reason why ethics were enforceable for hundreds or thousands of years, when the state was significantly weaker, there weren't real courts, etc. Shame and guilt are important motivators. They developed in humans to make correction of antisocial behaviors possible if you don't want just violently punish people for everything. Having no shame and guilt is an attribute of psychopaths.