dragonsh

Like you said its fine to promote language on its merit, but using false propaganda to promote it borders fraud and Rust community needs to act together to stop such practices.

Overhype within Rust community is a sign of fear among the community that some simple language (may be zig, nim or something new) might come and pull the rug under their feet. Given it compromise on simplicity in favour of quashing memory safety bugs.

One reason rewrite in Rust is popular because its easier to copy something already done vs doing something original (one recent example came to mind is rewriting gnu coreutils in Rust).

GPT-4 prompt: “Write an essay in 1000 words why Sam Altman should be fired by OpenAI board”

Response:

Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, has been a controversial figure in the AI industry. His leadership style, lack of transparency, and decision-making processes have raised significant concerns among OpenAI's employees and the public. This essay will delve into these issues, arguing that Altman's actions warrant his removal from his position.

Firstly, Altman's lack of transparency is a major concern. He has been known to make decisions without adequately consulting with his team or the public. This has led to a lack of trust and dissatisfaction among OpenAI's employees. For instance, when Altman announced that OpenAI would be focusing on a single project, he did not provide sufficient reasoning or context. This lack of communication has left employees feeling disenfranchised and uninformed.

Secondly, Altman's decision-making processes are often questionable. His decisions have not always been in the best interest of OpenAI or its employees. For example, when OpenAI decided to pivot from developing AI systems to developing AI safety research, many employees felt that this was a strategic mistake. Altman's decision to focus on this area without considering the potential negative impacts on the company's reputation and financial stability was a clear example of poor decision-making.

Thirdly, Altman's leadership style has been described as autocratic. He has been known to make decisions without considering the input of his team. This has led to a lack of buy-in from employees and has negatively impacted morale. For instance, when Altman decided to shift OpenAI's focus to AI safety research, many employees felt that their ideas and contributions were being overlooked.

Finally, Altman's actions have also raised concerns about his commitment to AI safety. His decision to focus on AI safety research, rather than on developing AI systems, has raised questions about his commitment to the field. This decision has also raised concerns about the potential misuse of AI technology and has led to a loss of trust among the public.

In conclusion, Sam Altman's lack of transparency, questionable decision-making, autocratic leadership style, and concerns about his commitment to AI safety are all reasons why he should be removed from his position at OpenAI. It is clear that his actions have led to a lack of trust and dissatisfaction among OpenAI's employees and the public. It is crucial that OpenAI takes these concerns seriously and makes changes to ensure the success and safety of its AI technology.

May be give anthropic a try the answer is more correct than ChatGPT, indeed in every subsequent attempt the quality of ChatGPT both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 deteriorated.

Here are the answers:

    ChatGPT:
      First response: 
        Mary is the sister of Susan and Susan has 7 brothers. Each of these 7 brothers has one sister, and that sister is Mary. So, Mary has 7 brothers, and she is also the sister of Susan. Therefore, Mary has a total of 8 sisters, including Susan.

     Second Response:
       Mary is the sister of Susan, so she has one sister. There is no need to consider the 7 brothers in this context as the question is asking specifically about how many sisters Mary has.

    GPT-4 Response:
       From the information provided, we can infer that Mary has one sister, Susan. The question specifically asks about how many sisters Mary has, and it doesn't mention any other siblings. Therefore, based on the given information, Mary has only one sister, Susan.

    Anthropic:

     Okay, let's break this down step-by-step:

      Susan has 7 brothers
      Each of Susan's 7 brothers has 1 sister
      So there are 7 sisters total (1 sister for each of the 7 brothers)
      The question asks how many sisters Mary has
      Mary is not mentioned anywhere else in the problem
      So there is no information provided to determine how many sisters Mary has

     Therefore, the question does not provide enough information to determine how many sisters Mary has. The number of sisters Susan's brothers have does not tell us anything about how many sisters someone unrelated named Mary has.

Not really comparable after paying for CoE for open category 152K SGD (US$104K), in Singapore there is a advanced registration fee called ARF,then there is additional tax on top. So a typical BMW X5 will be around SGD 540,000 (US$ 394,600) and that too for 10 years, after 10 years need to buy a new CoE or discard the car.

A Tesla Model S will be more than 400k for 10 years after that need another 100k for 10 year renewal.

Also fuel prices and road tax are high in Singapore which needs to be paid regularly besides buying costs.

> But that's missing the point that Python is still not meant to be the best at anything, but good at most things.

The most important thing about Python is readability and its part of its syntax and is one of the best languages out there for readability.

Zen of python:

  >>> import this
  The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters

  Beautiful is better than ugly.
  Explicit is better than implicit.
  Simple is better than complex.
  Complex is better than complicated.
  Flat is better than nested.
  Sparse is better than dense.
  Readability counts.
  Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
  Although practicality beats purity.
  Errors should never pass silently.
  Unless explicitly silenced.
  In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
  There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
  Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch.
  Now is better than never.
  Although never is often better than *right* now.
  If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.
  If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea.
  Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!
  >>>

1 point by dragonsh 3 minutes ago | root | parent | next | edit | delete [–]

I follow these simple rules for breathing

  1. Breathe to stomach not chest.
  2. Breathe by nose (unless swimming or underwater).
  3. Inhalation time and exhalation time should be equal and gap between inhalation and exhalation should be sum of it. If it takes x seconds to inhale exhalation should begin after 2x seconds and should finish in x seconds

 Retention (2x) = inhalation time (x) + exhalation time (x).

All the pranayam and yogic techniques try to make it natural to have this pattern and symmetry in our breathing process.