KingEllis

I had never considered until now that my left thumb never touches the keyboard.

Their website says 2014. Amazon says 2018. But definitely not 2024, unless I am missing something.

I would not use this because of the distracting stuff on the borders. Hardly "minimalist".

Can someone explain this? One three occasions in the essay, including the title. he adds a cryptic "2001 Tor". What does that mean? It does not exist in the many other mentions of the same book title. Also, Amazon believes the publication year is 2002. What is "2001 Tor"?

Well, either no, or I would not know, as the point is C++ programmers are not nearly as self-congratulatory.

100 percent

Can I guess, from one not in the field, and no one bothering to define it? "Large Language Model"? I don't think it is a "a graduate qualification in the field of law". JFCFFS

About a minute in, I could not figure out if satire or self-absorbed. I stopped reading.

The absence of the go binary as a tool (i.e. "go get ...", "go install ..." etc.) is odd, considering that is what has been eating Python's lunch lately.

> * Don't even think about using ML for this, that doesn't solve biases, it just hides them in a black box.

Can you clarify: what is "ML" here? "Machine learning", ML the language, MatLab, "machine language" (a.k.a. assembly), Matt LeBlanc? I'm out of ideas...

Comparing with a similar recipe I have, those look to be teaspoons.

Speaking as someone ashamed at having never taken Calculus, I didn't know there were 3 of them...

> the faux screen jump when Bowman nearly touched the edge, and instead shattered the glass. It really is brilliant, a movie within a movie.

> that the upright position of the monolith as it is presented is incorrect.

Can you provide references for either of these?