🇨🇦 tunetardis @ tunetardis @piefed.ca

Posts

1

Comments

14

Joined

1 mo. ago

I was kind of hoping for a window view. I can't even picture what travelling 600 kph at ground level would look like?

This reminds me of a story my dad told me. His school went on a field trip to an ice cream factory and he was, of course, expecting this to be the best day of his life. What he discovered, though, left him mortified. They were taking poor-selling flavours and running them back through the machine to change them to something better. If you buy some store brand chocolate and it has undertones of mocha, now you know why. I think of this now whenever I see a product that "may contain peanuts". Like they're not sure.

I sort of picture this when I see bread or tortillas marketed as high fibre even when they contain no whole grains.

Pokemon Go?

I can't remember which comedian it was, but he said whenever he hears something like 4 out of 5 doctors recommend a particular medication, he wonders what that 5th doctor knows that the others don't?

Microsoft cancelled its support for the Faster CPython project in May this year, as part of a round of layoffs

wtf did they actually axe Guido? I thought he was heavily involved in that.

When I first started taking climatology back in the day, I thought it a bit paradoxical that profs kept going on about how global warming would lead to more extreme weather when, on a first principles basis at least, I would've thought it should lessen weather variability. Anthropogenic warming is an insulating effect, and that should tend to even out conditions across the planet, just as insulating your home should reduce drafts and what not.

I guess my problem was that I had it in my head that greater variability = more chance to hit extremes, and we were going the other way. But the way things are playing out, it's less variability that is giving us what we view as aberrant weather. That heat dome that never leaves or that storm system that parks itself over your head for days on end. We get too much of one thing because the weather systems are actually becoming less chaotic and getting stuck in holding patterns for longer than is healthy.

Aw man, not the early 90s again…

As with most script languages, you can hit the ground running in a very procedural sort of way, as you don't even have to define a main entry point. You just start coding.

But Python certainly has an object model. If I'm not mistaken, everything in Python is an object. Like even functions.

I suppose there are some aspects of the class implementation that feel a little tacked on? Like the way you need to manage the self reference manually where it may be implicitly handled for you in other languages. At least the way you call super() now is a lot less kludgy.

One thing I miss a bit in Python is method overloading. In a general sense, function overloading is not an OOP feature per se, but I find it useful in OOP, particularly with object initializers. You can sort of achieve it with @functools.singledispatch but it's pretty janky. For initialization, I prefer keeping the __init__ method pretty rudimentary and writing factory functions to do more complex initializations. And with @dataclass, you can forego writing an __init__ altogether if you do it that way.

Ok, here's my question for an agoraphobe.

Let's say we one day decide to build a space colony, but it's sort of a one-way trip since the lower gravity would acclimatize your body in such a way that it would be difficult to ever return to Earth after several years on the Moon/Mars/wherever. And you would most likely live in an underground habitat where you would maybe make the occasional trip up to the surface to walk around outside, but it would be a hassle since you'd have to get all suited up. So most of the time you would be just chilling in your man cave or what have you.

As an agoraphobe, would you make the ideal pioneer on such a frontier?

For instance, if an AI model could complete a one-hour task with 50% success, it only had a 25% chance of successfully completing a two-hour task. This indicates that for 99% reliability, task duration must be reduced by a factor of 70.

This is interesting. I have noticed this myself. Generally, when an LLM boosts productivity, it shoots back a solution very quickly, and after a quick sanity check, I can accept it and move on. When it has trouble, that's something of a red flag. You might get there eventually by probing it more and more, but there is good reason for pessimism if it's taking too long.

In the worst case scenario where you ask it a coding problem for which there is no solution—it's just not possible to do what you're asking—it may nevertheless engage you indefinitely until you eventually realize it's running you around in circles. I've wasted a whole afternoon with that nonsense.

Anyway, I worry that companies are no longer hiring junior devs. Today's juniors are tomorrow's elites and there is going to be a talent gap in a decade that LLMs—in their current state at least—seem unlikely to fill.

My wife and I are hooked also. I bought the first book in the series and started reading it, but decided it's better to not get ahead of the plot, as every episode seems to end in a cliffhanger. (I don't think that's really necessary, as the show has enough pull to keep us coming back regardless.) I have a feeling though that once season 1 is done, I'm going to binge the novels.

Ok thanks I managed to subscribe eventually through the link: https://piefed.ca/f/allgames@piefed.social

There must be a more instance-agnostic way to do this though? 🤔 Something like !allgames@piefed.social maybe? Or is that more of a lemmy thing?

I'm new to piefed. Could someone explain how I can subscribe to these from piefed.ca?