Junior developers are entering a workforce where they will never not be using AI
Yes, in the same way junior pilots are entering a workforce where they will never not be using an autopilot.
Readit Newstpoacher commented on AI tooling must be disclosed for contributions github.com/ghostty-org/gh... · Posted by u/freetonik
tpoacher commented on I Prefer RST to Markdown (2024) buttondown.com/hillelwayn... · Posted by u/shlomo_z
I can see the advantages RST offers in term of HTML generation, but whenever I've needed to work with custom blocks like that, I've always just written HTML.
I'm not sure if <img src="file.jpg" alt="alt text"/> is less readable than
.. image:: file.jpg
:alt: Alt text
Sure, there are three or four lines here that you can omit using RST or markdown:
<!doctype html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<title>My blog page</title>
<body>
<h1>Welcome to my blog</h1>
<p>This is a bunch of text.
Feel free to stuff newlines here.
<p>This is also a bunch of text
<p>Here's a list just for fun:
<ol>
<li>This is the first item!
<li>This is the second one!
<li>Boom, a third!
</ol>
<p>Have an image: <img src="filename.jpg" alt="alt text goes here">
Automatically generating an index and such is nice, but five lines of Javascript can do the same. Plus, you don't need to run a second tool to "process" your input.
I generally use Markdown as a standardised way to format text that will probably be read in plaintext by other people, but when it comes to formatting documents, I don't see the point of most complex template languages.
Same. I have a couple of nice html templates (with locally-defined css and mathjax styling), and I now take all my notes directly in html in nano.
Once you've written a couple of documents, the usual tags become muscle memory and are no more of a bother to write than markdown. I've even created a couple of nano macros to automate some of the process.
"But it's not readable like markdown" you might say. Well. This might be true of 'some' html, especially autogenerated stuff, but the stuff I write is totally readable. Once you settle on some meaningful indentation and tag presentation conventions, readability is not a problem. We're talking about plain html documents, after all, not complex websites. The subset of html tags you'll need is generally very small and largely unintrusive.
I could even go a step further and say, my HTML is as readable as this guy's rST, but this guy's generated HTML code is far worse than how my direct HTML would have looked.
tpoacher commented on I Prefer RST to Markdown (2024) buttondown.com/hillelwayn... · Posted by u/shlomo_z
> Markdown is ubiquitous because it's lightweight and portable…
Markdown is ubiquitous because it’s easy for humans to read and write.
Markdown is ubiquitous because it is easy for humans to read and write AND enough humans used it to make it so.
The second part is more important than the first. There could be far better systems which not enough humans used to make ubiquitous. And as far as we know, markdown could be one of the worse ones, but became ubiquitous because it became ubiquitous.
cf: MS Windows.
tpoacher commented on Tversky Neural Networks gonzoml.substack.com/p/tv... · Posted by u/che_shr_cat
I've decided 100% of papers saying their modification of a neural network is interpretable are exaggerating.
Personally, I'm looking forward to MNNs: Mansplainable Neural Networks.
tpoacher commented on Tversky Neural Networks gonzoml.substack.com/p/tv... · Posted by u/che_shr_cat
Fools. Everybody knows a TLA (three-letter acronym) is instantly more marketable than a two-letter one (also abbreviated TLA, but we don't talk about Bruno and all that jazz).
You should have called it the Amos-Tversky Network, abbreviated ATN. An extra letter instantly increases the value of the algorithm by three orders of magnitude, at least. What, you think KAN was an accident? Amateurs.
Now you just sound like you're desperately trying to piggy-back on an existing buzzword, which has the same feel as "from the producer of Avatar" does.
Everybody knows a catchy name is more important than the technology itself. The catchy title creates citations, and citations create traction. And good luck getting cited with a two-letter acronym. Everybody knows it's the network effect that drives adoption, not quality; just look at MS Windows.
What. You think anyone gave a rat's ass about nanotechnology back when it was still just called "chemistry"?
/s
tpoacher commented on Pirate library operator arrested, study canceled for 330k members torrentfreak.com/pirate-l... · Posted by u/speckx
Seems dead on in this case.
Also generally typical of Stallman
tpoacher commented on The future of large files in Git is Git tylercipriani.com/blog/20... · Posted by u/thcipriani
That or rediscover the beauty of svn
(only half-trolling)
I mean ... it is a competitor ...
tpoacher commented on Century-old stone “tsunami stones” dot Japan's coastline (2015) smithsonianmag.com/smart-... · Posted by u/deegles
Maybe you mean democratic societies are badly equipped to regulate capitalist economies? There are zero successful capitalist economies that lack powerful governmental regulatory control.
Fukushima 1F was a failure of governmental regulation.
It's really important to understand that, because otherwise you inescapably frame the argument wrongly. Capitalism isn't the problem, regulatory weakness is the problem. No capitalist society can survive lack of effective regulation.
(Fukushima was bad, and an example of regulatory failure, but Japan's overall effective regulatory influence over its corporations — and similarly, its mafia — is the secret sauce that has made it an economic overperformer. China can also do that — because it is a brutal dictatorship. America can't do that — and things aren't looking good. UK retains the power to do it, but it's Keystone Kops. EU can't do it, either, for reasons I can't understand at distance.
But creating safe nuclear power plants is fundamentally the same problem as creating safe elevators. In a capitalist society, it's 100% about regulatory power and competence, and nothing else.
Partlially agree, but one needs to try really, really hard to intentionally overlook the whole "influence of corporate giants on government" issue before the government regulation argument carries any practical weight.
So if anything this weakens the Fukushima argument: in a country with excellent regulatory tradition and little evidence of regulatory capture, this is less likely to be about bad or lacking government regulations.
“Why can’t I play with the kid who is in timeout? Is it because you hate my freedom?”