Technically, Java has the same rule, it's just that all user-defined types are reference types, and so the zero value for them is always spelled "null". I'm not sure how Scala pretends otherwise, but I have worked with Kotlin, and non-nullable object fields and method arguments are always a bit of a lie, since the underlying JVM machinery always permits null. (Despite the original authors of Go being unfamiliar with Java, they do seem to have settled on a number of the same decisions.)
Personally, I'm fine with discriminated unions always allowing "nil" in Go, since IMO the most sensible way to implement them anyway is as a special case of interfaces. Not everyone feels the same way, though.
If you need better performance than a higher level language affords you, I would not recommend programming directly in asm. Instead, I would write a compiler. Raw asm is seductive since the start up cost is relatively low. You can get started in an afternoon. The trouble is that writing correct assembly is much harder than high level code. You have to hold in your head the register state at all times. You have to know if the function you are calling will clobber registers that you need after the call and manually save/restore them. This will slow down your velocity and the resulting code will be long and difficult to read. It will also rely on a lot of undocumented information that only resided in your head while writing and has since been evicted. Good luck debugging a program written in assembly that no one has looked at for two months.
On the other hand, if you write your own non optimizing compiler, you can avoid a lot of these problems by, for example, tracking what registers a function writes and ensuring they are saved before a call and restored after. Then you can actually get the raw performance of handwritten asm without the pitfalls (the resulting code would still he harder to read and maintain than equivalent high level code, but at least it would be tractable). Even better, you can write your own high level assembler that is actually portable to other architectures. For example, instead of directly modeling x86_64, your compiler can model a cpu with 16 general purpose registers and a set of instructions that map to x86_64 instructions. An arm port would be straightforward since arm also has 16 general purpose registers and you can model x86_64 instructions as one or more arm instructions (and you have extra registers for x86_64 instructions that must be modeled as multiple arm instructions). Or you could do the reverse and model 32 general purpose registers using arm instructions and use predefined memory slots as virtual registers on x86_64.
Right, I'm not saying "there are no differences between GitLab and GitHub". Obviously GitHub has a unique community with more OSS folks.
But you could pick almost any popular Internet site, craft your requirements to describe it exactly, and write a blog post lamenting how there's no alternative.
It doesn't mean there's really no alternative ... it just means you're a fan of that site, and you personally will never be happy with any other site no matter what.
You need to bring both cost and benefit into the argument, and it's not necessarily an obvious win for either side. There are a few complicating factors here.
The cost of running a model is not only $/token, but the salaries of the people managing/orchestrating the models. Once we factor that in, how much are we really paying per theorem?
The other factor is the subjective component of the value of a theorem. Not all theorems are created equal, and the only way to really measure the value is to ask professional mathematicians for their opinion.
Once we have both of these nailed down, then we can start to compare AI to human researchers.
Yeah, a lot of people have reported significant gains from "model fusion" lately, which I think the literature just calls ensembles. You just ask a bunch of models to do a thing and then you combine the results.
Research tasks benefit the most from this. I don't know about other categories of work, like programming. I imagine looking for bugs or security issues would benefit from it.
Sorry but are you saying the article is somehow inadequate bc it's largely about Mexico? Is Big Food expected to be an a USA-only enemy?
I urge you to re-read. there are many more important ideas there.
it's an international story. one of the main points are how much resources are wasted by international governments managing the diseases caused by bad foods and fighting these hundreds of lawsuits.
I think you are conflating senses of the word, or rather you are defaulting to a very specific usage. There's the usage "Iranian national cuisine" which as you say is inherently political in nature because we mean "nation" in a civic and territorial sense, subsuming e.g. Persian, Azeri, Kurd cuisines, among others. There may be objections to specific inclusions or exclusions as we are considering Iran as a civic and political entity with borders, as you say
But it's perfectly fine to refer to "Kurdish national cuisine" or Persian national cuisine or Azeri national cuisine even in the absence of any nation state. So I'm using the term in an ethnocultural sense, not in the sense of something sanctioned by a nation state or a political entity. See also black nationalism or Kurdish nationalism
It's a time of great change right now and fear is a natural response. The world is going to be a very different place in 4 years time. Try not to let the fear of an unknown future affect your experience in college. College is a great time to learn who you are, to learn what you like and what you dislike, make friends, understand people, pick up new skills and hobbies and drop old ones. I don't know you and where you're headed, but I know you're going to have a great time. Enjoy it and let the future come to you.
I have had a rocky but reasonably successful software dev career built off a CS degree, it's definitely possible
That said I don't think anyone should try and be "just a developer" anymore. The skills are too easy to learn for anyone who is motivated. The most successful dude I ever met in software was a tradesman that thought up a way to automate a lot of the work that went into providing estimates for his clients as a sales tool, taught himself C# and built it.
The code was garbage, it was buggy and messy and half the calculations were probably wrong in the end, but he still sold it to a competitor for millions. :)
I think a lack of experience outside of CS and Software really holds a lot of software devs back from building great and/or valuable things, because you can't have great ideas if you don't have a variety of experiences to draw from
Free means it's not yours, and could disappear or change at any time.
If you are a small software company, presumably your code is your most important asset. You should be self-hosting that, then you can know exactly where it is and whether it's actually backed up and you can instantly talk to the person who is responsible for it.
99% of commits on a project come from 1% of contributors, so the main issue w/ migrating to an alternative isn't the networking effect of github, rather that you can't carry over github specific stuff (prs/issues)
i personally like how radicle.xyz managed that, where they manage issues/prs/user identities as git objects, so your entire project is self contained as git repository
But it was always about the questions. Physics is difficult because you must formulate the right question to ask, and often once you do, the answer is revealed. Science, I think, it about creating many questions, then many hypotheses and discarding and weeding out the ones that don't work. This is the hard part: The creation of the report SHOULD be the easy part, and why do we care if it becomes even easier? That way we can develop more and more questions and hypotheses. AI cannot really help with the hard parts, it is not creative enough and lacks understanding of the real world.
I am shocked, shocked, that a company that is part of SpaceXAI would become hostile to its existing paying users and partners. This has never happened before in history.
I agree! Maybe my comment is misunderstood. I'm not saying "NAS" is the better term. Instead, I'm saying "NAS" is the word that people have settled on in the home consumer market. The word "NAS" is literally imprinted on the outside of box from Synology, QNAP, UGREEN etc even though they also run apps unrelated to pure NAS functionality.
>NAS brands show up on Google/Amazon searches because they're cross-advertising,
So... asking about running on jellyfin on a "home server", inevitably leads to responders talking about "NAS" ... but then again... if it's NAS running Jellyfin music server, it's not really a NAS anymore and the "home server" should be perfectly fine terminology for that! But the replies keep using that word "NAS"! (We keep going around in circles!) The original poster asking the question then adds a reply saying "From the others comments it also seems i should look into getting this NAS thing". Now he becomes one of them and starts using the word "NAS" on the way to having a "home server running jellyfin". The cycle is complete.
From that thread and observing how people naturally talk about this in the home consumer market, the word "NAS" just overwhelms "home server". Keeping the purity of the word "NAS" is not possible anymore.
Likewise, people use the word "phone" to describe the slab in their pocket even though it also has a camera, GPS navigator, calendar, etc. But we don't call it a more general term such as "multifunction pocket computer" or "PDA Personal Digital Assistant". Instead, everybody settled on the word "phone". Most people don't even use it as a phone but rather as a 2-way pager. Nevertheless, "phone" is the word we use even though it's inconsistent with all the features the device has and how we actually use it every day.
That's not the tl;dr I would have chosen at all. I would have gone to part 4e where I found this quote near the end:
> We should also note that these women work an enormous amount. We estimated, you will recall, working hours for our male peasants on the order of 2,500 to 3,500 working hours per year, massively more than modern full-time employment (40 hours per week is ~2000, typically around 1,750 hours after sick time, vacation, holidays and such). By contrast our peasant women are working in this model 3,760 hours per year, significantly more than their fathers, husbands and brothers and wildly more than modern workers.
It's nice to think that our ancestors didn't have to work as hard, because it justifies our own desire for more leisure time. IMO that desire is justified anyways; but premodern subsistence farming/any sort of self-supported lifestyle is incredibly labor-intensive compared to modern agriculture, regardless of whether you're a serf or a freeholder.
Genuine question: Have you considered moving to your own server?
I ran Forejo for a bit, but I made the mistake of trying to use Jenkins for CI, which is very annoying for someone who really doesn't doesn't enjoy devops work.
I find this whole way of looking at things weird. Did maths exist just to entertain and employ mathematicians? Surely maths is, like, useful? Not immediately, not predictably, but in the long run? In which case, whether mathematicians feel bad about it is mostly irrelevant - it's like complaining about the railway because it may put coaching inns out of business.
My projects are gone from microsoft github.com. Not because I decided to move away, but mostly because github.com is now blocking noscript/basic HTML browsers for most of its basic functions, then it was actually them who did boot me away.
I'm almost 50, but I absolutely could see how someone younger could view it that way -- precisely because the present is much more similar to than novel than it used to be?
SourceForge is your better “pre-git” analogue here, and, like SVN still exists and is actively maintained and used.