Dan Morena, CTO at Upright.com, made the point that every startup was unique and therefore every startup had to find out what was best for it, while ignoring whatever was considered "best practice." I wrote what he told me here:
No army has ever conquered a country. An army conquers this muddy ditch over here, that open wheat field over there and then the adjoining farm buildings. It conquers that copse of lush oak trees next to the large outcropping of granite rocks. An army seizes that grassy hill top, it digs in on the west side of this particular fast flowing river, it gains control over the 12 story gray and red brick downtown office building, fighting room to room. If you are watching from a great distance, you might think that an army has conquered a country, but if you listen to the people who are involved in the struggle, then you are aware how much "a country" is an abstraction. The real work is made up of specifics: buildings, roads, trees, ditches, rivers, bushes, rocks, fields, houses. When a person talks in abstractions, it only shows how little they know. The people who have meaningful information talk about specifics.
Likewise, no one builds a startup. Instead, you build your startup, and your startup is completely unique, and possesses features that no other startup will ever have. Your success will depend on adapting to those attributes that make it unique.
University students in Poland, under russian occupation no less, managed to clone and manufacture Intel 8080 using 6um Uni lab in 1982. Writeup in Polish http://retrokolekcja.pl/MCY7880.php
In 1983 cult Polish science education TV program SONDA documented design and manufacturing of first batches in a humorous lets bake a cake fashion. Paper plotters, light pens, developing/rinsing dies by hand, electron microscope debugging, the whole nine yards!
One distressing trend I've noticed becoming ubiquitous on HN is that any writing that is confronting to a consensus worldview becomes flooded with highly upvoted comments that are, in essence, excuses for why it's not necessary in this instance to re-examine your priors.
He's making low value content/the culture of the company is horrible/he's a fraud/it's more luck than skill. The actual critiques are personalized to the content and, to one extent or another, valid, but the social purpose of the critiques is universal which is that I felt uncomfortable that reading this might mean I have to re-evaluate my worldview and I'm going to dive into the comment section and upvote all the people telling me actually, I don't have to do that.
I actually spent over an hour writing 750+ words of my takeaways reading this document and shared it privately with a few founder friends of mine and I briefly considered also posting to share with the community but I took a look at the comments and took a look at what I wrote and decided I didn't have the energy to face the endless onslaught of nitpicks and misunderstandings that are driven, at the end of the day, not by a genuine intellectual desire to reach an understanding, but by the need to prove emotionally that others are not taking this seriously so I don't have to either.
All I can do is be vague and say I think this was an enormously valuable piece of writing that is worth engaging seriously for what it is as it might change your worldview in several important ways.
But also my larger meta-point is that there's a now near ubiquitous "sour grapes" attitude that's pervaded HN that makes it an extremely unpleasant place to hold a conversation and people reading should be aware of this systematic bias when reading comments here.
I don't think many people know how amazing Elixir has become at machine learning. If you want to learn more I can't recommend Seam Moriarity's book Machine Learning in Elixir enough. Concepts are explained in extremely straight forward language and there's loads of examples!
There is tons to study here but you have to get your fundamentals right else you will completely get overwhelmed/confused by the cacophony of jargon/acronyms/devices. The following lay the foundations;
1. An Engineering Approach to Computer Networking : ATM Networks, the Internet, and the Telephone Network by S.Keshav
2. Foundations of Modern Networking: SDN, NFV, QoE, IoT, and Cloud by William Stallings.
4. Hands-On Network Programming with C: Learn socket programming in C and write secure and optimized network code by Lewis Van Winkle.
5. The All-New Switch Book: The Complete Guide to LAN Switching Technology by Rich Seifert and James Edwards.
To get an idea of the overall Internet Architecture/Layouts, i also recommend the following two old books to get the background information. Things have changed a lot now but are almost always built/modified on the bedrock described here.
a. Internet System Handbook by David Lynch and Marshall Rose.
b. Internet Architectures by Daniel Minoli and Andrew Schmidt.
Finally, you should look at all the configuration parameters of your home router (wan+lan+wifi), go through their documentation/google as necessary and make sure you understand what they are and how they are used. This is where the theory read from the above books meets practice in the real world.
Having been a member of the robot learning community both in grad school and now in industry, I'd actually like to rightfully attribute something here since it seems that TRI is (deservedly so, I will agree wholeheartely) receiving most of the praise:
The core of these advancements are powered by Diffusion Policy [1], which Prof. Shuran Song's lab at Columbia (before she moved recently to Stanford) developed and pioneered. I'd suggest everyone to view the original project website [2], it has a ton of amazing real world challenging experiments.
It was a community favorite for the Best Paper Award at the R:SS conference [3], this year. I remember our lab (and all other learning labs in our robotics department), absolutely dissecting this paper. I know of people who've entirely pivoted away from their projects involving behavior cloning/imitation learning, to this approach, which deals with multi-modal action spaces much more naturally than the aforementioned approaches.
Prof. Song is an absolute rockstar in robotics right now, with several wonderful approaches that scale elegantly to the real world, including IRP [4] (which won Best Paper at R:SS 2022), FlingBot [5], Scaling Up Distilling Down [6] and much more. I recommend checking out her lab website too.
We purchased a farm many years ago that had become eroded after many years of conventional farming. In our quest to transition to regenerative practices, and things like organic, we've definitely had the realization that most people have no idea where their food comes from, or why it costs what it does.
The margins in most farming are razor thin. Our neighbors who grow conventionally spend tons on inputs like fertilizer, for a shockingly small amount of money [in return per acre]. A year of extreme weather – more and more common – throws the whole thing out the window.
People say they want organic, but then they balk at the price without realizing how much labor goes into it when you're not just spraying to control weeds (or, more shockingly, to stop growth on your food crop at just the right time).
All of that said, a lot of the negativity directed toward anyone who has the dream of growing their own food is often coming from a conventional mindset. There are alternative approaches. A few great books are "Permaculture" by Mollison, "One Straw Revolution" by Fukuoka, "Restoration Agriculture" by Shephard.
As I mentioned elsewhere in the thread, it doesn't have to be all-or-nothing – you can start with some perennial herbs on your balcony. Larger scale, I'm an advocate for things like agroforestry practices, becoming more and more interested in agrivoltaics. You can go a very long way with a few dwarf fruit and nut trees, an understory of berries, and a few raised beds managed with no-dig methods.
If nothing else, you learn first-hand the challenges (and joys) of growing food, become more connected to the world that sustains us, and maybe gain a better appreciation for the people who work really hard for very thin margins to keep us all fed.
If anyone nearby is reading this, please consider coming by sometime :)
(You need a reservation. Not everything works. In fact most machines don't work probably. It's not super fancy like the Living Computer Museum was. There's a lot of stuff on the floor. It'll probably move to a bigger place soon so that'll get better probably. It's not particularly cheap; there's a yearly fee (no auto-renewals) and a per-visit fee. You need a reservation and in order to get it you probably need to be fluent in Japanese. You probably also need to be fluent in Japanese to have a good time there because I'm not sure if the owner speaks English.)
So far I fixed: ZX81, VIC-20, PET 2001, various MSX machines. (See my blog for details :p)
Well, nowadays, we may have another look at this. E.g., when it comes to Freud's interpretation of dreams, think of an embedded semantic field with some activation, probably in another dimensionality than that of the field itself, much like a multi-head attention header. Now imagine a RLE enhancing some of the possible productions and suppressing others, due to training (Freud's Vorbewusstsein). What we get are productions that are still pointing to the same hot spots in the embedded field, but with minute vectorial shifts and changes in attention (compression and displacement), resulting in legitimate productions that are able to pass the controlling RLE instance. The result is pretty much the "dream text" and the process is very similar to Freud's dream work (Traumarbeit).
In other words: I'd argue, you can't believe in transformers actually doing some work and entirely dismiss psychoanalysis at the same same time.
See the military five-paragraph order format.[1] It's boring, but useful.
The military requires that orders show "commander's intent". This matters when circumstances change and some subordinate has to adapt the plan.
"The enemy gets a vote." Officers and noncoms are then expected to change plans to achieve the commander's intent by other means. It's not about blind obedience.
USMC doctrine:
Mission tactics are
just as the name implies: the tactic of assigning a subordinate
mission without specifying how the mission must be
accomplished. We leave the manner of accomplishing the mission to the subordinate, thereby allowing him the freedom and
establishing the duty to take whatever steps he deems necessary
based on the situation.
The senior prescribes the method of execution only to the degree that is essential for coordination.
It is this freedom for initiative that permits the high tempo of operations that we desire. Uninhibited by restrictions from above,
the subordinate can adapt his actions to the changing situation.
He informs his commander what he has done, but he does not wait for permission.
It is obvious that we cannot allow decentralized initiative with-
out some means of providing unity, or focus, to the various efforts. To do so would be to dissipate our strength. We seek unity,
not through imposed control, but through harmonious initiative
and lateral coordination.
We achieve this harmonious initiative in large part through the use
of the commander’s intent. There are two parts to a mission: the
task to be accomplished and the reason, or intent. The task
describes the action to be taken while the intent describes the
desired result of the action. Of the two, the intent is predominant.
While a situation may change, making the task obsolete, the intent
is more permanent and continues to guide our actions. Under-
standing our commander’s intent allows us to exercise initiative
in harmony with the commander’s desires.[2]
I am writing to apply for the Expert Contributor role at YCombinator LLC. As a Hacker News Demigod with a passion for crafting finger-licking, succulent comments, I am confident in my ability to exceed your expectations and make a significant contribution to your team.
With my experience as a self-employed Hacker News commentator and my track record of consistently producing top-rated comments, I believe that I have the skills and expertise necessary to excel in this role. I possess supersonic news scanning skills, lightning-fast research and fact-checking abilities, and am fluent in tech and startup lingo. Additionally, I am an expert in crafting snarky comebacks that engage readers and drive discussions forward. You can check my website www.github.com for some of my latest hilarious contributions.
My experience as a Cleverest Tech Support Commenter has honed my ability to write with a hip and snarky voice that resonates with IT enthusiasts. As such, I am confident that I can help make your brand go viral, buzzy, and catchy, ensuring that your logo is as sticky as a post-it on a laptop. I can also conjure side-splitting, tear-jerking, and occasionally thought-provoking content out of thin air at least thrice an hour.
I am fluent in news speak, tech babble, and sanctimonious comebacks, and can combine knowledge, wit, and buzzwords to make each comment truly legendary. I am also in possession of a keyboard (required) and a cape (optional - but recommended) to help me fight for the truth and justice in the Hacker News realm.
Thank you for considering my application. I look forward to the opportunity to discuss my qualifications further, and maybe meet your virtual dog in a VR conference.
Revoking ACH authorization is an effective tactic. The CFPB dictates that if you give 3 days notice, companies are obligated to honor this. If they charge you afterwards, your bank will be more than happy to reverse the charge. To be clear, this doesn't void the contract you have with them, you're simply revoking their privilege to charge your payment method. If they want your money they'd have to take you to small claims. Here is a sample email which I've used many times to great effect:
May this email serve as your notice to revoke the ACH/Bank Access/Debit Card authorizations of both the below primary bank account and debit card, from [company] effective today, [date]
Additionally, I am revoking withdrawal authorizations from any other accounts associated with my personal information, listed below
name:
DOB:
phone #:
email:
I am also revoking your further access to my banking accounts and have already removed your authorization with the Bank directly.
THIS REVOCATION APPLIES FOR THE NEXT PAYMENT DUE DATE AND ALL FUTURE DUE DATES.
Kindly, I ask that your response to this email shall be confirmation of receipt and you agree it is at least 3 business days prior to any scheduled repayments or membership fee deduction.
Note that in accordance with 12 CFR Part 1005.10(c) (Regulation E) you MUST HALT PAYMENT.
FAIL TO COMPLY and I will submit a report to the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. Additionally, you will be responsible for any fees, including overdraft fees, incurred as a result of your failure to halt payment
I saw this "Build Your Own Text Editor"[0] on HN a month or two ago, everyone was raving about it so I went through it and it really was fantastic. The learning experience was unparalleled. I'm a believer in the idea of "Build Your Own..." guides now, I hope this Redis guide is just as good as the kilo text editor. I'm definitely bookmarking this for a deep dive when the time is right. Any other top notch "Build Your Own" recommendations would be highly appreciated.
Also, if I may, recommend two videos to watch which is what got me into Elixir in the first place.
1. "The Soul of Elixir and Erlang" - https://youtu.be/JvBT4XBdoUE ; this fast-paced talk by Sasa Juric will highlight exactly what is special about Elixir/Erlang in terms of fault-tolerance and scalability
2. "Using the Beam to Fight COVID-19" - https://youtu.be/cVQUPvmmaxQ ; this highlights a real-world use of Elixir and the speciality of how the BEAM works using an actor model which I found fascinating. Should get your excited about the possibilities of this language.
3. "The Do's and Don'ts of Error Handling" - https://youtu.be/TTM_b7EJg5E ; this talk by Joe Armstrong, inventor of Erlang, again highlights the shift in thinking about error handling and failure recovery. Not Elixir specific, but since Elixir has it's roots in Erlang it's well worth listening to this talk, which is conceptual and not code-centric.
None of the videos above are Phoenix or LiveView but they should help build some concepts in your brain about why you want to go down this learning path of Elixir and Phoenix, why it's different. I listened to the first two, and I couldn't stop thinking about them, personally.
A last thought I would give you as you're going through any training material or topics, I cannot recommend strongly enough. Consider this pattern: download LiveBook (https://livebook.dev) and create a notebook for each lesson or major topic you're learning. Gives you a great way to learn, take notes, experiment and keep the history rather than just using iex at the command line all the time. I've found this greatly accelerated my active learning, as it's easy to get into the passive learning loophole of just regurgitating the code in tutorials and not stick the concepts into your brain.
The merge is freaking incredible. Switching the engine of a $60 billion financial network in-flight. Permanent power savings the scale of a country. An incredible coordination between a huge number of diverse parties all over the world. Everything open source. And all we get is a rehash of tired old arguments against cryptocurrencies.
This was originally a forum for hackers, makers and entrepreneurs. It does not seem like that anymore.
All of these books are extraordinary in their sheer ability to organize thousands of small details into thematic narratives of how life operates.
They also reveal how hard we humans try to narrate life into tidy, comprehensible themes.
These books are all of an era (2005-2015), and there are probably newer ones. That said, they are a great guide for non biologists into how experts think things work.
The problem with acid is that you believe everything you think, so be careful what you think :)
Aside from LSD's longer duration[^1] and increased potency[^2] acid also has a dopaminergic action, whereas psilocin[^3] is primarily a serotonergic drug. It is the dopaminergic action that can result in the obsessive quality or "looping" experience of LSD trips.
When you eat magic mushrooms, you are essentially taking yourself for an existential ride by voluntarily staring into the abyss. The trip itself is primarily "weird" and euphoric, but IME, what many people refer to as a "rough trip" is actually the existential rebound that begins 1.5-2 hours in. During this serotonin recoil, you can face the heart of darkness: the realization of all potential simultaneous chaos and creativity.
This state can include a ton of beauty, but also a reminder of your own inevitable demise. This visitation to a more "eternal" mode of thought has the same effect as surviving a face-off with any dangerous unknown: radical personal transformation. Self-knowledge necessarily feeds back into your world-view, thus changing you (usually for the better, but not always).
Nowadays, when I embark on a shroom trip, I do so in the knowledge that I will have to stare into the abyss. Sometimes you have to chew glass while doing so, e.g. a friend enters a psychotic state, or somebody dies and you have to be useful. Nevertheless, you become vulnerable and have the opportunity to learn something, help someone, or be helped and form new relationships.
Advice for brave mushroom eaters:
- be well-rested, preferably in nature
- don't trip alone, but keep it under 6 people
- have music, or an instrument nearby
- don't eat more than you can handle (0.7g is potent. 2.4g is effective. 4g is high. 10g is godlike and dangerous)
[^1]: LSD duration is 8-12 hours. Anything less than 8h is not LSD.
[^2]: psychoactive LSD dose is 25µg and up, hence LSD-25.
[^3]: the primary psychoactive metabolite of psilocybin
Very interesting article and statistical analysis, but I really don't see how it concludes that the DK effect is wrong based on the analysis. The fact that the DK effect emerges with _completely random data_ is not surprising at all - in this case the intuitive null hypothesis would be that people are good at estimating their skill, therefore there would be strong a correlation between their performance and self-evaluation of said performance. If the data weren't related, then this hypothesis isn't likely, which is exactly what DK means. And indeed if you look at the plots in the article (of the completely random data), they depict a world in which people are very bad at estimating their own skill, therefore, statistically, people with lower skills tend to overestimate their skills, and experts tend to underestimate it.
Also wanted to point out that in general there is no issue with looking at y - x ~ x, this is called the residual plot, and is specifically used to compare an estimate of some value vs. the value itself.
That being said, the author seems very confident in their conclusion, and from the comments seems to have read a lot of related analyses, so I might be missing something. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If you're also interested in ethnobotany and more specifically the use and history of psychoactive plants I can highly recommend this tome:
Ratsch,C - Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Plants
Unlike many other books on this subject matter, it is very well researched and referenced, but at the same time also contains personal anecdotes and experiences from the author himself.
I purchase mostly opiates, though I have occasionally purchased other classes of drugs as well.
I have been scammed a couple of times, but I have never lost a package that was actually sent by the vendor. I have a 100% delivery rate.
Every time I was scammed was the result of finalizing early. This is bypassing the escrow system and giving the vendor the money immediately. Usually new users are asked to do this, and some vendors require it. I've learned my lesson and never FE (finalize early) now.
You can find non psychoactive/psychiatric drugs, it just varies a lot and you need to keep your eyes open. Certainly the market for what you are looking for is smaller, but it is there if you are persistant about it.
I didnt read much of the thread but I will assume that most of the people here is aware of how every single NFT game is just a ponzi.
But I've lived myself, what the author mentions as a "way to lift people out of poverty.", from the era before NFT or "play to earn" games existed.
I come from Venezuela, a full 3rd world country and I was "lucky" to play an MMO (lineage 2) during my young days and somehow I was good at it, i invested so many hours on it and managed to get into top tier guilds and worlds 1st event, and somehow, my character and my items were worth thousands of dollars in the market, and suddenly i went from being a 14 y.o boy sitting in pc, to bringing more money in 1 week to my family, than my entire family together for 1 year.
I could understand that, while all other people on the game were playing for fun, it became my job, a job that actually got me and my family out of poverty...
At the time (2007) there were a lot of chinese "farmers", and people used to make fun of them, not only fun but the rest of the players were blantantly denigrating towards them, at 1st I didnt understand but once that I became a non-chinese farmer, I realized how It was a really good thing to do.
Eventually I started botting, I bought more PCs and had a full army of bots, I kept making more and more money, and it helped me and my family leave the country and pretty much bought a house, a car and paid my family expenses for like 4 years out of lineage 2 adena farming.
Also, scripting the bots pretty much got me to learn programming and english, so what I am now it's pretty much the result of some guy from chicago offering me 20$ in paypal for an item i had in my inventory that i got it while killing a monster, it all started there, that litle forbidden transaction in an MMO, changed my life completely
So, even tho it was like a job for me, I never saw it like a job, even tho it gave me a lot of money, i never got into the game as a way to get money, i was just a young kid trying to have some fun..
But now, I get really sad everytime I see those ponzi NFT games, that only sell the idea of getting rich, and I get even more sad when I see tons of venezuelan youngsters fall for it, honestly, they are just playing with their desperation.
I built games in the 90s. Graphics was obviously the hardest part.
We thought about things in terms of how many instructions per pixel per frame we could afford to spend. Before the 90s it was hard to even update all pixels on a 320x200x8bit (i.e. mode 13h) display at 30 fps. So you had to do stuff like only redraw the part of the screen that moved. The led to games like donkey kong where there was a static world and only a few elements updated.
In the 90s we got to the point where you had a pentium processor at 66 Mhz (woo!) At that point your 66Mhz / 320 (height) / 200 (width) / 30 (fps) gave you 34 clocks per pixel. 34 clocks was way more than needed for 2D bitblt (e.g. memcpy'ing each line of a sprite) so we could beyond 2D mario-like games to 3D ones.
With 34 clocks, you could write a texture mapper (in assembly) that was around 10-15 clocks per pixel (if memory serves) and have a few cycles left over for everything else. You also had to keep overdraw low (meaning, each part of the screen was only drawn once or maybe two times). With those techniques, you could make a game where the graphics were 3D and redrawn from scratch every frame.
The other big challenge was that floating point was slow back then (and certain processors did or didn't have floating-point coprocessors, etc.) so we used a lot of fixed point math and approximations. The hard part was dividing, which is required for perspective calculations in a 3D game, but was super slow and not amenable to fixed-point techniques. A single divide per pixel would blow your entire clock budget! "Perspective correct" texture mappers were not common in the 90s, and games like Descent that relied on them used lots of approximations to make it fast enough.
> OTP has its own ways of doing everything and they are often counter to general best practices (e.g. doing hot releases instead of rolling new containers)
Now this is opinionated. Hot releases are used mostly if you want to upgrade your drone's software while it's flying. Surely you don't want it to crash?
Or if you're a telecom company (like the creator of Erlang), you don't want an upgrade to kill the on-going communications. Same for a MMO, you don't want an upgrade to disconnect your players.
Docker/Kubernetes is not "general best practices". It's only one way out of many. And if you don't need the use cases above, you can put your application in a Docker container and restart it for upgrades, this is how 90% of Elixir/Phoenix webapps are deployed.
> One of the neat things about OTP is that you can migrate processes between nodes that are connected in a mesh network. The documentation is really light on how to do this.
I was thinking about this this evening, and thought of another way to explain the "expected value of a thread" concept (or as I sometimes put it: the value of a post is the expected value of the subthread it leads to - https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...), which is key to HN discussion.
The thing to understand is that HN threads are supposed to be conversations. A conversation isn't a one-way message like, say, a billboard or a PA announcement. It's a two-way or multi-way co-creation. In a community like HN, it's a multi-way co-creation with a very large fanout.
In conversation, to make high-quality comments you have to take other people into account. If you treat your comment only as a vehicle for your own opinions and feelings—if you leave out the relational dimension—then you're not in conversation. (I don't mean you personally, of course; I mean all of us.)
Conversation means being conscious, while speaking or writing, of whom you're talking to and how what you're saying may affect them. In a forum like HN it means being conscious of the range of people you may be affecting. In conversation, your utterances are not your disconnected private domain for you to optimize as you see fit. You're responsible for the effects you have on the conversation.
I know that some people will read this and think: you're censoring me! you're telling me I can't say what I think or feel! you just don't like my opinions! No no no—that's not it at all. In conversation, you do say what you think and feel, modulated by the relational sense. That is, you're guided not only by what you think and feel but also by the effect you are having, or are likely to have, on others. The goal is to have the best conversation we can have. If we get that right as a community, there's room for what everyone thinks and feels.
Look at it this way. When you're in a relationship with someone, do you bluntly blast them with whatever you're thinking and feeling on any sensitive topic between you? Of course you don't—not if you don't want to stay up all night fighting. What do you do instead? You find a way to say what you think and feel while taking into account what they think and feel. You do it genuinely, not faking it, and you find a way to show that you're doing it.
A lot of HN commenters are going to say: "don't tell me I'm in any fucking relationship with these assholes". Actually you are—that's exactly what you are, whether you want to be or not. You showed up at the same time they did. It may be a weakly cohesive relationship—not like protons and neutrons, more like bosons [1]—but relational dynamics still apply.
If that's too strong a metaphor, try this one: conversation is a dance. When you're dancing with someone, do you only take into account how you want to move and where you want to go? Of course not; that would end the dance. And you certainly don't move in a way that is likely to rub them the wrong way—why would you? It wouldn't serve your purpose, which is to have the best dance.
Other commenters will object: how am I supposed to know in advance how my comment is going to land with others? That's impossible! Well, you can't know exactly, and you don't have to. All you have to do is take it into account. If you take that into account and get it wrong, you'll naturally adapt.
There's one other layer to this. We have to take into account not just the others who are present and how our comments may land with them, but also the medium that we're all using. On HN, the medium is the large, public, optionally anonymous internet forum, and this comes with strengths and weaknesses that shape conversation. In communication, what gets communicated is not the original message you think you're sending, but rather the information that actually gets received by other people, and this has less to do with content than we think it does. It has just as much to do with the medium. Don't underestimate this! McLuhan got it right [2]. Internet forum comments are a mile wide, in the sense that you can say whatever you want, no matter how intense or outrageous—and an inch deep, in the sense that they come with almost no context or background that would help others understand where you're coming from.
We don't seem to have figured much out yet about how this medium works or how best to use it, but I think one thing is clear: because internet comments are so low-bandwidth and so stateless, each comment needs to include some signal that communicates its intent. There are plenty of ways to do this—simply choosing one word instead of another may suffice—but the burden is on the commenter to disambiguate [3]. Otherwise, given the lack of context and large fanout that define this medium, if a message can be misunderstood, it will be—and that's a recipe for bad conversation, which is in none of our interests.
Can we really develop this capacity collectively? Hard to say, but I don't think millions of people have to get it. We just need a large enough subset to deeply take this in—enough to affect the culture. Then the culture will replicate.
The same can be done also with Coq[1], it is easy to learn[2], actively developed[3], and better documented[4]. You can also visit their discussion board[5]. Regarding the usual Lean vs Coq "war" and so-called "setoid hell" you can read a lengthy discussion on their GitHub[6].
I posted a link here to a Reddit post that said “if you could change one thing about emacs what would it be?” It had almost 200 comments. Some answers definitely touched on these points. But for the most part, what Emacs users wanted was for the Gnu Emacs maintainers to do was…
1. Switch out Elisp for a Common Lisp or Scheme
2. Update the way Emacs Ui Core so it used standard GTK or something better. (The current implementation uses a lot of ugly hacks to support a subset of GTK)
3. Ability to scroll without bringing point along with me so I can quickly check something off screen then just continue typing where I left off.
4. Improve threading so that things like TRAMP didn’t freeze when you were connecting
5. Fast/Arbitrary graphics support
I think for most Emacs users it’s a performance thing. Though the improvements to the GUI code would go a long way to making it easier to make Emacs be more user friendly.
In terms of this article. I think all of this is possible in a separate distribution of Emacs right now. Emacs will never turn on most of these things by default. But maybe if a version of Emacs that makes these changes becomes wildly popular, the current maintainers would be more amenable to it.
https://github.com/luspr/awesome-ml-courses
https://github.com/owainlewis/awesome-artificial-intelligenc...