Sad to see GPT-4.5 being gone. It knew things. More than any other model I'm aware of.
Readit Newsmeribold commented on GPT-5 openai.com/gpt-5/... · Posted by u/rd
meribold commented on Dotfiles feel too personal to share hamatti.org/posts/dotfile... · Posted by u/speckx
I think it's even realistic to say that dotfiles are vulnerable to being used as a fingerprint mechanism by nefarious packages. One could easily create an inventory of github profiles <> dotfiles; then read local dotfiles when their package gets installed on a developer laptop.
Such a nefarious package could also read browser cookies, SSH keys, emails, photos, and a million of other things.
Then you’re at the mercy of a third party service for access to your notes.
That depends on the messenger app. Telegram, for instance, supports backing up messages as HTML and/or JSON.
This seems almost uselessly simple to me. The “cognitive overhead” of a list of notes feels trivial considering this is a person who managed to put their words online.
The issue isn’t cognitive overhead, it’s not having rituals to review and refine your thoughts. Everyone has to jot down ideas from time to time, but if you never take time to stop, review, and organize your thoughts then sure it’ll feel like a lot of cognitive overhead.
> person who managed to put their words online
He also managed to do quite a lot of other things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrej_Karpathy
This system seems quite similar to sending messages to oneself on Signal/Telegram/whatever. What I like about using messenger apps is that every note gets a timestamp and that messenger apps are, in my experience, more polished than note-taking apps.
I run i3wm (poorly :P).
Does anyone know whether it would it be possible to trick i3lock (or something similar) into showing the output of this "tool" instead of a static image?
Would be a fun look, with the added bonus of some colleagues potentially being tricked into thinking they have an opportunity to mess with my machine. :D
There are screen-locking programs that don't hide what's on the screen (for example `alock` and `xtrlock`). So you can use one of those in a script that also launches this tool.
Not in a balanced tree, since the further down the tree you go, the longer the shared prefix between the search key and node key becomes.
So the complexity becomes something like 1 + 2 + 3 + .. + log n = O(log^2 n).
Good point. Perhaps we could store the length of the common prefix from the last time we went left as well as from the last time we went right. The minimum of those two should remain a common prefix with the search key for the rest of the lookup and should therefore be safe to skip during subsequent comparisons.
To be fair, in tree tables, we also assume that comparison is a constant time operation as well when it also necessarily needs to be O(log(n)) for an arbitrary sized table, making it an O(log(n)^2) data structure by this standard.
You don't need to compare the whole key most of the time. I think the amortized cost for a comparison is in O(1).