fear91

I don’t get what’s the point of non-profits if you can IPO them. How does that make any sense?

Why not finance a more wide tax break for tech companies, including small companies?

I have seen first hand, one of my classmates from high-school, whom I didn't consider to be too bright, receive a 100k EUR grant to build an esports platform that ended up being a styled-up wordpress blog. He had zero interest in tech, never programmed, the works...

He had no interest nor knowledge relating to tech, but managed to somehow get that grant. Meanwhile, I was paying taxes on hard earned freelancing dev money. We were both 23 years old at the time and it was really jarring.

I'd rather they cut taxes for already profitable small companies. The taxes in EU are astronomic.

Same here, paying for Pro but I just get redirected to vanilla version...

A rare game where having worse PC actually made you perform better. It was easier to time the jump perfectly. I recall starting 5 instances of it to slow it down as a kid and beating records. Fun times.

And Mahomes wouldn’t last a 3 minute round with a boxer.

Calling American football “one of the most competetive sports on Earth” feels like a stretch. It’s big in US, but not that popular anywhere else.

Honorary mention:

SAFe agile

No, Haswell's PAUSE is 9 cycles, the P-cores of Alder Lake are 160 cycles. Zen 4 is 65.

It differs by CPU model.

Jakub Pachocki from OpenAI is polish too.

It's an example of how trivial some of this low hanging fruit is, the above is a concrete case that I have personally implemented (arithmetic of in-register 64/32-bit integers). You can get into semantics and restrictions, but I think the point I'm raising is clear.

This is an assumption that a reasonable person naively comes up with.

Then if you actually go ahead and check, it turns out it's not true! It's quite a shocking revelation.

When you dig into the popular compilers/runtimes (with the exception of things like LLVM)

Many of them still have low hanging fruit of the form:

a = b + c - b

Yes, the above is still not fully optimized in the official implementations of some popular programming languages.

Also an optimization of "removing redundant function calls" isn't a binary on/off switch. You can do it better or worse. Sometimes you can remove them, sometimes not. If you improve your analysis, you can do more of that and improve performance. Same for DSE, CSE, etc...

The nice thing about compiler optimizations is that you can improve performance of existing CPU's without physically touching them. Year by year. You squeeze more of the machine someone designed. It adds up.

Imagine what environmental impact you would have if you optimized Python's performance by 1%? How much CO2 are you removing from the atmosphere? It's likely to overshadow the environmental footprint of you, your family and all your friends combined. Hell, maybe it's the entire city you live in. All because someone spent time implementing a few bitwise tricks.