It’s not and the reason you can’t have that conversation is that the people you are replying to are emotionally and cognitively in many respects children.
“ In Japan, you can be held in a police detention center for up to 23 days for a single arrest before formal charges are filed”
Maybe you’ll get thrown into a terrible situation some day and develop some trace of compassion. Until then it would be wise keep these sorts of ugly thoughts to yourself.
Self glorifying nonsense. Gorbachev ALLOWED Poland to not get crushed. You think Poles were any braver in 1989 than the Chinese people who laid down their lives in Tiananmen? You think your solidarity was in any way superior to what they did, what the Hungarians and Czechs did decades earlier? You succeeded due to good timing and because Gorby was your ultimate overlord rather than Deng Xiaopong. Poles should go thank him.
People didn't go towards "it mostly works", people go towards "it works at all". A lot of people tried to use xhtml, and it didn't work, broken content was pervasive and the experience when facing broken content was irredeemable.
All async systems have pitfalls, I'd say core.async's are pretty minor compared to most other systems. You're right that `go` can encourage bloated functions and it would be better if it, for example, handled exception propagation (I would guess every serious core.async user has written their own go-but-with-exception-handing macro, it's not hard but it is unfortunate duplication of effort).
(I've never had to think about the state machine code when debugging and I've done a lot of core async debugging. That part really does seem to just work.)
To be more clear, I didn't mean debugging the generated state machine itself.
What I meant was, the use of the go state machine renders certain debugging techniques useless. E.g., stacktraces are less helpful, and js-debugger is pointless, since you can't guarantee the (js-debugger) will get grouped with the state you're trying to debug.
Frequently print/tap is sufficient, but core.async/go narrows your options.
This was actually detectable in the calls to the providers if they went as described. The credit card company tells them the perk subscription is active and the streamer says it has been cancelled. ("There was a valid activation of the streaming perk, and a confirmation from the provider" vs "The subscription had been activated, then cancelled in an orderly fashion about 5 minutes later.")
This is perfectly in line with the actual async problem, but differs from what they put in the summary ("Support on both sides saw an orderly activation followed by an orderly cancellation, with no errors").
Extremely long winded. I think this person is trying to throw stones at someone else’s work, but their own is so elliptical I lost the will to find out.
Not taking away the right to your opinion, but I couldn't disagree more; I found it an excellent sociological article. One, it takes the formal concept of "bullshit" and applies it to knitting in a very methodical and strict manner. I found it novel and convincing, and the examples were great; not contrived or forced at all. IMO it was much better than many academic books or articles; an immediate share.
Two, the turns of logic are clearly laid out, in a conversational way, which would make it easy to stick a wrench in and form a polemic if you found any of her arguments or logical implications specious. That said, that does make the article quite long. But then, it is anything other than "elliptical", which I think you used as "runs in circles and repeats itself often", while it actually means "omits parts and thus is difficult to understand" (like the ellipsis sign: …).
Also: what the heck is wrong with that podcast farm founder. I hope they have a bad year.
I was a couple of images in before I sussed it. Bullshit images, but pleasing enough to look at. Without the images, it would have either been a big wall of text, which would have put me off reading, though I did give up about 25% of the way through after sussing the images and thus the incoherence in the argument.
The images bring something to the article. They were cheap/quick to generate. The increase the potential payoff (more reader) without significantly increasing the cost. Without the images, the payoff(readers) would likely have been lower, below the cost of actually writing the article. Same goes for a history of knitting podcast or that video. Production costs would not be worth it for a very niche viewership.
Reading that made me feel like you wanted to be contrarian from the get-go and dismiss the article with the least effort possible. The whole point of the images is that they're low-effort AI slop, it's part of what she's trying to point to when someone is generating unsupervised automated podcasts about knitting.
I came in indifferent but it doesn’t take much to make me give up on an article linked on hacker news. I use it as bubblegum while waiting for a compile/prompt, intent ally for stuff that can be dropped easily. I saw her disclaimer at the end. My point was that the slop images make a more appealing article than if they were absent
I may have different perception facilities in the brain, but to me the images in the article are horrifying. Such bad, Frankenstein-level, criminal butchering of absolutely everything!
So you're saying you can spot AI generated bullshit, but not spot a deliberate and hilarious contrivance that the author uses to reinforce their point?
You only had to reach the second paragraph to find the example of an 8-person company that uses AI to generate “about 3000 podcast episodes per week, hosted by AI personalities.”
As a digital pedant I am very sympathetic to what prompted the creation of Atom. RSS2 for example under-specifies item "description" and "title," in particular how to put HTML in there, and using the most once-most-common technique (entity escaping HTML) makes it tricky to reliably do more basic things (encode/decode left angle brackets and ampersands, because now you don't know whether to do so singly or doubly).
But the undeniable victory of RSS shows the importance of being first and "easy" (even when "easy" means sweeping edge case problems under the rug). And of humans: Major publishers like the New York Times had adopted RSS and saw no need to switch to Atom because it was good enough. I'd argue the (also underspecified) CSV format is another example of this phenomenon.
(As for the entity escaping dilemma, people mostly just moved to using CDATA for their feed-embeded HTML, although I imagine people who write RSS readers still need to come up with semantics for figuring out if a title or description payload contains encoded html or not.)
I've never seen an Atom formatted podcast. NYTimes and WSJ each have a whole page devoted to their RSS feeds, I've never seen an Atom feed from either of them. It caught on sorta but didn't get the traction of what it was designed to replace. (Not saying this makes it Bad, btw.)
That's a good point. Podcasts are still (almost?) exclusively RSS 2.0. IDK if this is just momentum or Apple rules but I don't think I've ever seen an Atom podcast.
But many podcast clients actually still support Atom (probably using a feed library that supports various formats?) and basically all non-podcast feed readers support Atom.
For that matter—not seeing the source interactions or the prompts—I wonder the extent to which business owners see business relationships as negotiated rather than “picked from the shelf.”
When I’m dealing with small businesses, I tend to explain my frustrations long before I cancel, and offer them a chance to fix them. Whereas with an off-the-shelf product, there’s no point: I say “just cancel my subscription please and thank you.”
I could see that being coded as “confrontational,” but more often than not, I and the vendor fix what’s bothering us and continue with our mutually beneficial relationship.
Oftentimes, I’m not the only customer with that pain, and fixing it with me has the happy side effect of making their product or service more attractive to others too.
By the time I do leave for good, that process has failed, so it doesn’t surprise me that there will be residual reasons for leaving…
Unlikely. The majority of businesses are bootstrapped with a loan.
Those that survive are often the result of an owner who had their hand on the wheel through some very desperate times, times which would have killed the business had they stopped micromanaging.
reply