slver (u/slver) - Readit News

slver commented on What Made Early Humans Smart nautil.us/issue/102/hidde... · Posted by u/dnetesn

stonlyb · 4 years ago

The comment you're replying to at least attempts to use actual logic statements.

slver · 4 years ago

It doesn't seem that logical statements matter:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27722154

What matters is just grabbing some pitchforks and cancelling someone.

slver commented on What Made Early Humans Smart nautil.us/issue/102/hidde... · Posted by u/dnetesn

nobrains · 4 years ago

What a racist top illustration.

1) If you avg. the colors of all humans it is not the light shade that is shown

2) Seems to imply lighter skin shade = smarter

(The article, however, is great)

slver · 4 years ago

If you look for racism, you'll find it, even when it's not there. Skin color is a function of two things:

1. Amount of environmental sunlight (latitude).

2. Amount of circumstantial exposure to sunlight (lifestyle).

If the assumption is that early humans have lived more outdoors than sitting in caves all day like the modern human does in practice, then yes they'll have darker skin overall.

Is it racist to just state basic facts, or should we brainwash everything to be uniform and average across time and space?

slver commented on What Made Early Humans Smart nautil.us/issue/102/hidde... · Posted by u/dnetesn

est · 4 years ago

My own hypothesis is walking not only freed our hands, but also freed our mind. The human are the rare if not only species relies heavily on remote projectiles for attack. Most other animals are melee main. (I happy to be proven wrong)

Now the fun part. If you are melee main, you just out-run your food and bite them, simple. However, to master remote attacks, you must predict how the prey moves. You have prepare carefully, plan how your projectiles fly, or else you get nothing.

This enforces us to mimic other animals, the better we think like the prey the better we catch our food or avoid big monsters. This is how primitive animal worship originates. Those who understands animals best are the most wise person in tribes.

This also give us apathy and self-awareness, and ultimately, the consciousness, and it catalyze our social structure, because collaboration makes hunting much more efficient. This motivates our ancestors to evolve as a group.

Projectiles gave us an artificial world with a beauty of its own. Parabola is studied extensively throughout history.

A species's food source depending on ultilizing projectiles think differently than other animals. Bipedalism hominins are meh, but bipedalism hominins having stones in their hands are extremely dangerous.

(Btw, are there any books or papers supporting my idea?)

slver · 4 years ago

You're describing features that many other animals have. Being bipedal, hunting, using projectiles, and so on.

slver commented on Apple and Intel first to use TSMC 3nm electronicsweekly.com/unc... · Posted by u/walterbell

hyperpallium2 · 4 years ago

noob question, but how is the performance better? I thought clocks weren't increasing (due to heat), so is it that smaller chips mean more per wafer, therefore cheaper and you can buy more?

I recall a Sophie Wilson talk about how things will never get faster, past 29nm.

slver · 4 years ago

Clockrate is not a bottleneck on how fast your computer is. It's just a synchronization primitive.

Think about it like the tempo of a song. The entire orchestra needs to play in sync with the tempo, but how many notes you play relative to the tempo is still up to each player. You can play multiple notes per "tempo tick".

slver commented on Copilot and Conversational Programming jessmart.in/articles/copi... · Posted by u/jessmartin

neatze · 4 years ago

> telling a computer what I want, it does it

More like, computers do what you tell them to do, and not what you want them to do, don't recall who's quote it is.

slver · 4 years ago

That's kinda the case with Copilot, or I'd just type:

    // Unify relativity with quantum mechanics.

I'm trying to say Copilot is not a fundamental shift to programming. It's what programming already is, and we already have IDEs assisting us with refactoring and second-guessing our intent with autocomplete (which in some IDEs is powered by AI now, as well).

Programming is like working in a team. You try to communicate with your teammates, and then everyone does what they can according to their skills, and how they understood the task.

The shift to higher-level communication in programming is inevitable, will it look like Copilot, I don't know.

slver commented on Copilot and Conversational Programming jessmart.in/articles/copi... · Posted by u/jessmartin

truth_seeker · 4 years ago

Cool but its a no match for well designed full stack web framework or Low Code Tool.

slver · 4 years ago

Yes, it literally isn't a match. It's also not a match for a pepperoni pizza.

slver commented on Copilot and Conversational Programming jessmart.in/articles/copi... · Posted by u/jessmartin

slver · 4 years ago

Programming is already conversational. I'm telling a computer what I want, it does it, I see what it does, and elaborate or correct myself where necessary. Repeat endless times, until product exists.

slver commented on Copilot regurgitating Quake code, including sweary comments twitter.com/mitsuhiko/sta... · Posted by u/bencollier49

saiojd · 4 years ago

Not the parent, but people really like to get riled up on the same topics, over and over again, which quickly monopolizes and derails all conversion. Facebook bad, UIs suck, etc. We can now add to the list, "AI will never reduce demand for software engineering".

slver · 4 years ago

Well, "never" is a long time.

Copilot is definitely no replacement for anything except copying from Stack Overflow for juniors.

But in the long run, AI is us basically us creating our own replacement. As a species. We don't realize it yet. It'll be really funny in retrospective. Too bad I probably won't be alive to see it.

slver commented on Copilot regurgitating Quake code, including sweary comments twitter.com/mitsuhiko/sta... · Posted by u/bencollier49

okl · 4 years ago

That depends https://randomascii.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/float-precision...

slver · 4 years ago

A lot of these edge cases are about theoretical concerns like "how many digits we need in decimal to represent an exact IEEE binary float".

In practice a double is 15.6 digits precise, which Excel rounds to 15 to eliminate some weirdness.

In their documentation they do cite their number type as 15 digit precision type. Ergo that's the semantic they've settled on.

slver commented on Copilot regurgitating Quake code, including sweary comments twitter.com/mitsuhiko/sta... · Posted by u/bencollier49

tyingq · 4 years ago

>As a side note, Excel also uses floats for currency

It's still problematic, but the defaults and handling there avoid some issues. So, for example:

Excel: =1.03-.42 produces 0.61, by default, even if you expand out the digits very far.

Python: 1.03-.42 produces 0.6100000000000001, by default.

slver · 4 years ago

Excel rounds doubles to 15 digits for display and comparison. The exact precision of doubles is something like 15.6 digits, those remaining 0.6 digits causing some of those examples floating (heh) around.