nurbl

I had a recurring abstract nightmare as a small kid (don't think it was related to fever but I guess those were pretty common) which was basically about a line, gradually becoming messier and messier until it was all just a big jumble. I could never explain it to anyone else, but it terrified me for a time.

Funny, that happened to me just this morning, I awoke from some kind of alarm signal, very close by. But I could not find any possible source for it, so I am sure it was part of a dream. In fact I forgot about it until now.

About the second thing, I have felt something similar. Especially the part about it originating around the collar bone and neck. It's probably something like a nerve misfiring. I sometimes think it's weird that the body doesn't misbehave more often than it does, it's an enormously complex system after all.

I saw a cartoon that captured this pretty well; a pianist who looks pensive, thinking "I don't enjoy this at all". The caption is something like "how to know you're a professional".

Everybody runs this risk, but "creative" jobs probably more so. Not being able to enjoy what you're doing even if you're successful. It may be because there's always a pressure to improve. But it could also be because the inner motivation that used to drive you has been replaced with external rewards. C. Thi Nguyen calls it "value capture".

I agree with the author's friend in that it's up to each of us to find creativity, it must come from within.

I believe the basic idea is similar, but there's an enormous difference in the space of possible moves between chess and Go. Go has a larger board and moves are less restricted. There was a major breakthrough in Go playing programs a decade or two ago when good Monte Carlo methods were developed for it. But still I think the ability to simulate many moves is less powerful in Go.

You don't think there are any other aspects worth considering than the mere quality of the code produced?

I'm professionally a python programmer with no C/C++ experience, and I do some hobby programming in zig. I tried rust but it seemed complicated and kind of boring. Zig was a lot easier for me to get into. I don't mind that it's obscure and a bit of a moving target, but I have yet to do anything really "serious" with it.

I think the point of the saying is that as systems tend to expand, sooner or later we become part of them. That means that we can no longer see them from outside, we're now part of the system and our goals and the system's goals will align. Then the purpose of the system can't be anything else than what it does.

Carrion Comfort was my introduction to Dan Simmons, I loved it. Not as good as some of his later stuff but it's really inventive, and never boring.

Well there was no way the show would be quite as good as the book. But I was still pleasantly surprised, it was definitely better than the average TV adaptation. The actors were very good.

Yes. There will always be people who see opportunity in using it destructively. Best case scenario is that others will use it to counter that. But it is usually easier to destroy than to protect. So we could have a constant AI war going on somewhere in the clouds, occasionally leaking new disasters into the human world.

Interesting. I like the discussion about "Shadow of the Colossus", it's one of those few games that goes its own way and really sticks with you.

Also, weirdly, the article references Brian Moriarty's "Who buried Paul?" but not "An Apology for Roger Ebert" which seems even more relevant :D

I think the effort is indeed a big piece of it. For example, consider sports. I don't imagine that a lot of sports fans would be interested in watching completely AI-generated video of their favorite teams playing, even if it's totally believable. Surely the main point of the whole thing has something to do with humans at the top of their skill, measuring up against each other, and experiencing it together with them?

For me it's the same with music. I am sure I will be fooled by some AI generated music now and then, but what does that prove?

Though in principle they serve similar purposes there are some big differences though. Python with types is still just python. Typescript is a different language from JS (guess it a superset?) and it being controlled by a large company could be considered problematic.

I suppose JS could go in the same direction and adopt the typing syntax from TS as a non-runtime thing. Then the typescript compiler would become something like mypy, an entirely optional part of the ecosystem.

I don't have experience from any larger application, but from my smaller usage Preact seems like a drop in replacement. It's been compatible with the react libraries I've tried. It also works great with ES modules. So for simple stuff, I think it's worth a try.

I think a better word may be "explicitness". Zig is sometimes verbose because you have to spell things out. Can't say much about Go, but it seems it has more going on under the hood.