mapcars

In 5 years that strategy might not be competitively viable anymore

oldest known animal

>Students need to understand what AI is and is not.

Do we really understand what AI is and is not? For example we all know AI can hallucinate, but how does that knowledge help us in practice? If I'm leaning something new I would have to fact check everything which would take about as much time as learning from verified sources.

V is a super young language, I wonder if llms even can produce decent code with it.

>MCP apparently reduces probabilistic failures

Does it really do that much difference? I mean in the end robots process MCP output the same way they would process API docs.

Easily? The only one I'm aware of is Asahi Linux and they are still far away from having good level of support

It seems like an attempt to port Svelte's features to React-like api?

Interesting, I wonder what does no-runtime option mean, no event loop and no async code then?

Interesting, I have been skeptical about .net as a platform, is it really open and doesn't lock you with microsoft in any way?

Go, C# and .Net? And here I am wishing for typescript-like language for backend systems.

I can't prove it in scientific ways, the thing is at some point scientists defined an atom as something indivisible, today we know they study sub atomic particles, and even finer things, waves or strings or whatever. In the same way 100 years from now our science will look primitive, physics will be few levels deeper, but there always be the next thing. Its like a pattern of nature.

I'm saying this from a perspective of practicing powerful spiritual practices and having certain experiences. They actually make one experience infinitive nature of consciousness, and somehow realize this is the way everything is made.

Even human perception is able to peek into the infinite nature of things, not the intellect though, the intellect can only work with limited and defined "things".

It's unknowable through current means of science. There are ways to experience that, I did some of them so I'm talking from my experience. And no, I can not prove it, if it was provable like that it would be already done.

Reality does not have amount of details, it is infinite in all directions. Its only that we perceived certain amount of details, some more some less. One can spend their whole life mastering a single aspect and there always will be room to improve.

I'm not defending it, I'm saying "cringy sexist bullshit" is just a modern liberal western take. It could have been something like "people might see it problematic", and I agree with that.