rogue7
Joined 8 years ago
Karma
103
Submissions
71
Member since
Aug 27
Recent submissions
Comment · 3 months ago
what are you talking about ?
Comment · 3 months ago
Kind of agree, but in my view preventing the programmer to make mistakes is futile. I have seen awful stuff in languages made to prevent errors.
It's much better to give all the power to the programmer, to allow him to fix his mistakes rather than fantasising about preventing them.
Comment · 6 months ago
IMHO surveillance is a problem when it is asymmetric ; which is obviously the case here. Governments for example are watching everyone inside and outside, but the people that are being monitored simply cannot really watch the people watching them. Don't you agree ?
In this view, maybe an ultra radical solution to privacy issues is : no privacy at all, for no-one. Complete and total transparency of everyone to everyone. Now the question is how to implement that ? That's obviously impossible, because someone in power will always have something to hide. So maybe if true democracy where everyone holds exactly the same amount of power that could work ? Same issue, because it is impossible to implement too. Oh well.
Comment · 6 months ago
Agreed for cheaper prices and more flexibility. At least this is what we think we want. But do we actually want it ?
A computer 40 years ago was way more expensive than now. How did people do it ? They managed. How do we do it now ? We manage, similarly.
Was there an improvement in things ? Obviously, computers are more powerful for example. But with less powerful computers, people could also be happy I believe.
I remember 15 years ago, tech has obviously evolved a lot since then, and I have learned to use more and more tech tools. But am I more efficient than then ? Happier than back then ? More skilled than back then ?
- More efficient for some things, less efficient for others. - Happier ? no. Not sadder either, similar. If anything, it's not related. - More Skilled ? No. Skilled at other things. For example my handwriting is still ok but I believe I won't be able to write so much or so quickly or so well as I used to (I should try though).
Am I saying that progress is not real ? No, of course not. Progress happens. But is it what "people" want or need ? Taking my own perspective : if it happens (and it does), I adapt - no problem. If it does not happen somehow - then I would adapt too. That's what we do.
Comment · 6 months ago
Personally, it depends. If I could automate taking the trash out, I would do probably want to do it (not sure though). But what remains when everything is automated ?
Well, so far we have been automating many things, and we are still busy working and living as always. It's of course impossible to automate everything - we always have things to do, by necessity by also by choice ; do we really want to be idle and contribute nothing to society ? I don't, and I am sure nobody does. Being useful is an essential need.
Is it pointless then, to automate more and more ? No. It's a way to move forward, and not necessarily a "bad" way. Just not the only way.
Comment · 6 months ago
Never heard of this joke, very funny !
Comment · 1 year ago
For this I use gron [0]. It's very convenient.
Comment · 1 year ago
This looks neat. However since I read about Koka's dot selection [0], I keep thinking that this is an even neater syntax:
fun showit( s : string )
s.encode(3).count.println
Comment · 1 year ago
I built a small static web app [0] (with svelte and tensorflow js) that shows gradient descent. It has two kind of problems: wave (the default) and linear. In the first case, the algorithm learns y = ax + b ; in the second, y = cos(ax + b).
The training data is generated from these functions with some noise.
I spent some time making it work with interpolation so that the transitions are smooth.
Then I expanded to another version, including a small neural network (nn) [1].
And finally, for the two functions that have a 2d parameter space, I included a viz of the loss [2]. You can click on the 2d space and get a new initial point for the descent, and see the trajectory.
Never really finished it, though I wrote a blog post about it [3]
[0] https://gradfront.pages.dev/
[1] https://f36dfeb7.gradfront.pages.dev/
Comment · 1 year ago
Vaping is way less harmful than smoking.
See e.g. the study [0] conducted by Public Health England that concludes vaping is at least 95% (!) less harmful than smoking.
See also this video [1] that shows graphically the different impact it has on the lungs.
[0] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-le...
Comment · 1 year ago
> 5. Many of my current projects take the form of "big data pipeline, followed by intermittent job to rebuild a static site and push it live"; astro fits very nicely in this role
You may be interested in Observable Framework [0]
Comment · 1 year ago
In this case `d` is the entire dataframe. It's just a way of "piping" the object without having to rename it.
You are probably thinking about `df.apply(lambda row: ..., axis=1)` which operates on each row at a time and is indeed very slow since it's not vectorized. Here this is different and vectorized.
Comment · 1 year ago
Agreed 100%. I am using this method-chaining style all the time and it works like a charm.