I also have aphantasia and I do believe I have SDAM, too. I also had a traumatic childhood and am a combat veteran. I think I've always been this way but that's a hard question for me to truly answer and is one that I grapple with a lot, actually.
> How about the pain of reliving old memories? I could do with a little less of that right now.
I don't relive the past the way it seems most people do. I know what it's like to feel hurt or feel stuck but I don't generally feel emotions about things in my past. That's good because I've endured a lot of bad shit but also sucks because my wedding day is kind of like any other day to me, as was the birth of our kids. I guess I know all of the good and all of the bad things that have happened to me -- though I don't really carry them with me the way some people seem to, they're part of me but I don't spend much if any time ever thinking about them -- but I don't feel any particular way about any of it. I know that I love my wife and kids more than life itself, I know these facts and I know the timelines but there's not much else there. I know these things but there's no emotional weight to them.
Me too. I’ve had some very traumatic experiences the last few years, and the emotional scars will never heal. I’m not the same person I was before, and I never will be.
Some people these days are hoping to combat aging and make potentially infinite life extension possible. I find that idea far more terrifying than death. Infinite lifetime would mean that experiences more emotionally and physically painful than I can even imagine would happen countless times. Slowly I would become so messed up by all the accumulated traumatic memories that I would no longer be able to function at all. I would only consent to an infinite or radically extended lifetime if I could also selectively erase memories I don’t want to keep.
I have many times thought about how scars and tattoos have a lot of similarities. From a certain perspective, a tattoo is simply a bit more intentional. A tattoo is like saying, "I belong to this group and it shows". I think of an emotional scar as a tattoo that is 100x bigger than a regular tattoo: it's so big, that you can't see it, it's like not being able to see an image when you zoom in too much. And, even though you might not see it with the naked eye, you can feel it, it's something on you that says "I was there", "I experienced that", "I used that to become the person I am".
And, then you might recognize that all of our personalities are constructed out of these scars, it's just that most of them we're not aware of and most of them aren't painful to think about. A time comes, when you notice that your association with a given negative memory becomes more neutral, there's a bit more distance between you and it.
I can say for myself that every experience I labeled as negative, I was haunted by, turned out to have a positive outcome at the end. There are hardships that "haunt" me now, and I don't know how it will have been a positive influence on me, but I believe that it will, and that helps.
I hope I don't come across as pushy with my viewpoints. I resonated deeply with what you said, and felt the need to share.
By the way, a practical tip, I find that if I prompt an LLM with something like:
> I'm going through [a difficult time]. Help me reflect. Ask a question or give me a prompt, I'll respond, and so on. Act like a friend.
That has been for me surprisingly effective for releasing debilitating emotional stress.
Maybe we should come back to this in a few years, I think this will have aged worse than the old dropbox comment.
Governments are falling over themselves to: acquire drones, figure out how to defend against existing and future drones, and to figure out how to exploit them well. Given the recent attack against Russian bombers, I find it hard to take you seriously here.
Hell, the US knows it can't compete with China on aircraft numbers, and is placing its money on collaborative combat aircraft to give it the advantage. That's about as strong an endorsement as you can get.
What the Loyal Wingman program is trying to build is extremely far from what people keep thinking when someone says "drone". The word is overloaded as hell: no one draws a distinction between a quadrotor with a 20 minute flight time and an air breathing jet aircraft costing $20 million a piece.
But then they go and say "drone swarms will defeat all future adversaries!"
Like in the Ukrainian context everyone seems to think the drone swarm was the deciding factor and is saying "this will replace air forces!"...kind of ignoring the multi month infiltration and espionage operation which got those systems in range (they were literally trucked right up to almost the fence line).
"when someone says", "no one draws" ... who are these people you're talking about? The folks I listen to make it very clear the kinds of platforms they're talking about, and use different terms to describe things at different levels of specificity.
Many/most folks use the term "drone" to talk about CCA's and other expensive platforms. In fact, "drone warfare" predates the common application to quadcopters, people were calling the Predator drone a drone in the early 2000's. I do agree that calling everything a drone is annoying though, and makes it hard to know what people are talking about. "AI" is having the same problem today.
The general public. If the people you're talking to are military or professionals, then fairly obviously they'll be setting up very precise language and expectations.
But every post vaguely about drones on HN has a whole bunch of people acting like a 1000 quadcopters will replace an F-35.
So I think we’re on the same page when it comes to the layperson’s ignorance on the subject, and I agree the term is mostly useless. I also agree that quadcopters aren’t the endgame of future warfare, although I’ve been entirely shocked at how effective they’ve been so far.
I don’t really put much stock in your average person’s take on warfare generally, so I’m not too bothered by the torrent of misunderstanding. You see the same thing with AI/AGI, and much of it is fueled by those garnering for clicks.
I will say I missed in my original response that the OP was taking exclusively about autonomous devices, and in that case I would agree with their take.
As if the US can compete with china on drone numbers or quality. If drones are the future of war, China will have an enormous advantage in a future war. Let's hope it never comes to that.
Agree 100%, it's a funny strategy but also shows how weak the US hand is - China can pump out extraordinary numbers of these things, and they have pretty incredible tech talent. I wish I didn't live in such interesting times.
Dude, it's not a prediction, it's what is currently happening. If you follow active drone units (from both sides) you'll see that they're all controlled by operators until the last frame.
These bombers attacks were done with manual control too. These drones had LTE modems and on footage it's clearly visible that they controlled by operator.
People can't read these days, especially if it doesn't match the reality they build in their heads.
Oh I see - emphasis on the 'autonomous' part, yeah I would agree on that for today. Things are pretty immature on the autonomous side right now, but that will definitely change ... it's still the military, so it'll take a while, but they'll do it when they're forced to.
I'm sure that everyone would agree on that, and that $bad_actor wouldn't take advantage of the fact that everyone else had agreed to lay down their arms. Game theory sucks, but it's hard to get around.
Our jobs are full of a lot more than just writing code. In my case it seems like it’s helping to accelerate a portion of the dev cycle, but that’s a fairly smart portion, say 20%, and even a big impact on that just gets dominated by the other phases that haven’t been accelerated.
I’m not as bullish as some are on the impact of AI, but it does feel nice when you can deliver something in a fraction of the time it used to take. For me, it’s more useful as a research and idea exploration tool, less so about writing code. Part of that is that I’m in Scala land, so it just tends to not work as well as a more mainstream language.
We haven’t used it to help the product management and solution exploration side, which seems to be a big constraint on our execution.
I’d call out patternitis and over-OOPification way before I’d criticize DDD. Yes, the latter can go too far, but the two former cases are abused on a much more frequent basis. Happily the pattern crazyness has died down a lot though.
Memory mapping is fun, but shouldn't we have some kind of async IO / uring support by now? If you're looking at really high-perf I/O, mmaping isn't really state of the art right now.
Then again, if you're in Java/JVM land you're probably not building bleeding edge DBs ala ScyllaDB. But I'm somewhat surprised at the lack of projects in this space. One would think this would pair well with some of the reactive stream implementations so that you wouldn't have to reimplement things like backpressure, etc.
Last time I measured on Linux (a few years ago), with NVMe, mmap + calling out to a thread pool to async-page-touch (so the main thread didn't block) was faster than io_uring (from the main thread) for random access reads.
I think perhaps I’m old school, but I’ve been using xosview with a patch that shows ccx utilization (on AMD) instead of per core. Treats me pretty well, but it’s a very unloved project.
reply