mattxxx

typst is so good! the syntax is cleaner, and it's much easier to write re-usable and clever formatting.

LaTeX will have a special spot in my heart, but it's pretty bloated (even minimalist distributions) and suffers from being an early pass at a problem.

It's pretty daring to do something like this. Something so brazen has a 100% chance of getting caught given enough time...

That said, installing any package is a liability, whether it's a library or an mcp server.

well, manipulation is more about intent, rather than technique... I think it doesn't matter if you chose the correct "door" if you're trying to get someone to operate against their own interests.

> unless you're a mathematician

As a young math researcher, my mentor definitely did not believe that Math was the absolute descriptor of the universe.

You can definitely imagine a scenario where the world does not operate perfectly mathematically correct though Math still exists - as an abstract separate entity.

You can do this such that everytime you recognize a new quirk in the world, then you can invent some new math/logical framework to match/approximate the current understanding. I don't know if this is the reality of this world, but when you look at things like complexity theory you have to wonder "okay... maybe we designed a useful system rather than discovering a true law of reality"

honestly, that's pretty good

I guess it's kinda nicely genuine that the "four panel comic strip" has some errors in it (misunderstanding caption + cat high-fiving itself in the bonus fifth panel)

great article - it's very true that:

1. it's very difficult to verify how a llm will behave without running it 2. there is an intentional ignorance around the security issues of running models

I think this research makes the speculative concrete

also love when a fansubber will just outright give you an asterisk explaining a joke that relies on nuance or wordplay

all code is legacy code; git repos are mausoleums

Weird thing: the timestamp on the upper right part of the camera is "01-02-1970" :thinking_face:

The article is good, but maybe a bit negative on the postgres feature. I think the article reads much better with the slant:

  "LISTEN/NOTIFY got us to this level of concurrency; here's how we diagnosed the performance cliff, and here's what we're doing now."

Which is like... cool, you were able to scale pretty far and create a lot of value before you needed to find a new solution.

agreed - it helps transpose skills.

That said, this comes up often in my office. It's just not giving really good advice in many situations - especially novel ones.

AI is super good at coming up with things that have been written ad nauseam for coding-interview-prep website

Well, firing someone for this is super weird. It seems like an attempt to censor an interpretation of the law that:

1. Criticizes a highly useful technology 2. Matches a potentially-outdated, strict interpretation of copyright law

My opinion: I think using copyrighted data to train models for sure seems classically illegal. Despite that, Humans can read a book, get inspiration, and write a new book and not be litigated against. When I look at the litany of derivative fantasy novels, it's obvious they're not all fully independent works.

Since AI is and will continue to be so useful and transformative, I think we just need to acknowledge that our laws did not accomodate this use-case, then we should change them.

Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is Alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange.

agreeing with the point the question makes here; the game theory of global politics does not work with the same morals that we prescribe individual people