Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | saberience's comments login

It doesn't work in Windows so how is it cross platform?

Also, I've been using terminals since DOS in 1990 and never once have I had to say, "I wish this terminal had more performance", so I'm not sure that performance is really relevant here. If I write a command to build my project which takes 10 mins to build, does it matter whether the terminal command ran in 10 milliseconds vs 1 millisecond?

In the linked speed demo one command was 8 milliseconds faster than another. Ok?

Is a terminal written in Zig better than one made in C++ or Rust? Again, unsure why its relavant at all.


> It doesn't work in Windows so how is it cross platform?

Linux and macOS are different platforms. Would calling it multi-platform make you happier?

> Also, I've been using terminals since DOS in 1990 and never once have I had to say, "I wish this terminal had more performance",

I remember the Windows terminal being unbearably slow in the past and wishing it had better performance.

Maybe this just isn’t for you.


If you use something like tmux you will notice higher latencies. Clearly, if you've been using terminals since DOS in 90s and the issue does not bother you, then you are likely happy with whatever it is you are using. If you want to look into the issue and read on methodology used before I recommend Dan Luu's from 2017 [1]

[1] https://danluu.com/term-latency/


| In the linked speed demo one command was 8 milliseconds faster than another. Ok?

For day to day, ls'ing files that speed up won't matter too much. It is when you are tailing logs or working with multi-gig files that it matters.


are you still running DOS too?

log(x^2 + 1) + sqrt(x) + x/exp(sqrt(4x + 3)) < Cx.

I don't get why this is true. If C is 1 and x is 2

log(x^2+1) sqrt(2) + x/exp(sqrt(4*2 + 3)) is not less than 2.


The statement wasn't that it's true in general - only that there existing constants C and X>0 for which it is true for all x>X.


Are you suggesting humans are deterministic?


A little bit, we are. With some degree of confidence, given the incentives you can predict the output.


I’ve literally never heard anyone refer to chatgpt as “chat”. In fact, I don’t believe your anecdote.


My coworkers also watch a lot of twitch so chat was already something they said before.

It's for sure something I say...


And it's why better than someone calling it chat gip-uh-dee (pronounced with a J sound like GIF :) )


Jippity sounds dumb but it's growing on me. I wonder if that domain is still available... No, registered in 2023


I just call it "cat".


He has a social media platform now that actively suppresses liberal viewpoints, so he’s a complete hypocrite.

He’s happy to censor some things, but complains about free speech when things he likes, you know, like racist hate speech, is censored.


You have zero evidence of that.

More likely you’re just used to suppression of everyone right of you, and when that was taken away you think it’s unfair.


Yeah, I'll worry about him suppressing liberals when he bans the onion for making a joke.

Until then, I'll call it an improvement.


Yes but see the group size limits on iMessage which is 32!!

Effectively making it useless for so many people, the reason is due to e2e encryption.

In contrast, Telegram has groups with 1000s of participants, but only possible as they don’t use e2e encryption.


The best plural is simply keeping the word the same as the singular. I.e. "octopus". There are many animals using this form, e.g. fish, deer, elk, salmon, buffalo.

E.g. Look at all those octopus.

All the divers I know say it this way, easy to say, understand, doesn't make you sound like an asshole.


That's hardly 'the best'. Recognizable plural is a useful language feature.


This is what I would say.

It does beg the question though, how’d we come up with the list of animals to pluralize like that? Why “five birds” but not “five deers?”


It raises the question - begging the question is something else.

As for the question, it probably has to do with the gender of the noun. I bet 'deer' derives from a neuter-gendered word in Anglo-Saxon, while 'bird' does not.

Noun gender is the system used by many languages to categorize words that have different declension rules. It's atrophied in English, but is implicitly still present in the various "inconsistencies" that pop up.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question I actually had no idea about that distinction, appreciate it.

Noun gender makes a lot of sense.


Note that those are animal we generally hunt/eat. I'd bet this is tied to the language of the ruling/hunting classes of England, back when they spoke French more than English.

There are also some middle-ground words like "Shark". One goes fishing for "shark" like they would "fish" but it is more common to say "several sharks" using a plural as opposed to "several fish" using the singular. But "fishes" is still a word, which likely goes back to ruling classes who ate fish but generally did not hunt them as they would have deer.


"Fishes" is a plural of a plural. You wouldn't likely say "two fishes", but you might say "all the fishes in the sea", referring to many groups of fish (much as you might refer to the "peoples of the world" referring to many cultures). Aside from that, I bet you're onto something.


I think it was done just to make it harder for those languages that do not have a concept of plural. Of course I'm kidding, but it has to be super frustrating trying to learn it as ESL.


I've seen it used for a company with way, way in excess of a million users. We used it for a system with 100M+ users for our login systems and in general all of our main account systems relied on it. Most of the brokers were always running at 15k to 25k messages per second.

I loved it and the only issues we had were due to our fuckups.


Dysphemism isn't an innovation, it's been around a long time. It simply means the opposite of a euphemism. Where a euphemism is a nicer way of saying something, a dysphemism is a worse or derogatory way of saying something. E.g. Referring to your car as a "banger"


"Banger" is a good thing, I think it comes from "head banging" at concerts.


No its not. It means its banged up. Broken. In the case of cars. In the case of a "banger of a tune", you are probably right.


I meant the novel use of “raw dogging”


There's nothing particularly original about the UI, it's literally just a basic image upload and sound upload. I can easily see every hyperscaler AI firm offering something similar within one year so no need to get on your high horse about this.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: