lad

Yeah, the visualisation is great, that is for sure

It is only clear if you already have a model of how labels work in Python and while it is understandable to me now, I wouldn’t say this is anything I would expect

Then again, shadowing variables is allowed in other languages and is also a source of confusion and mistakes at times

I don’t think mutability is wrong as a concept, albeit I enjoyed learning and toying with Haskell, but I really think these functions in Python should have been two sets of operations, one set to do what a += b does and one set to do what a = a + b does.

I’ve been doing C++ for quite some time and amount of implicit things that happen magically and not everyone get them right and this leads to bugs and confusion had really grown on me with time, and I feel like this is the same pattern here, where we get implicit magic instead of being clear with intentions and results

I feel that things like this lead people to say something along the lines of ‘mutability was a mistake’

I’m only half serious, but this is really surprising without Python background

But takes forever to set up (at least for me, when I set it up for cross compilation)

I think it’s akin to ‘GIF is pronounced ziph’

Whic is very much not precise, as explained in introduction to this article, for instance

Maybe if you mean things like two eyes, two hands, two feet, one nose, but not in any details

It seems to mean the prints of digital photos they were compressing, as it wouldn’t involve scanning

That’s nice, albeit I want to point out for anyone wondering that this is only conjectured and not guaranteed:

One of the properties that π is conjectured to have is that it is normal, which is to say that its digits are all distributed evenly, with the implication that it is a disjunctive sequence, meaning that all possible finite sequences of digits will be present somewhere in it.

There is no guarantee for any specific sequence to appear in π, but for short chunks chances are better (it’s not really a probability, but it’s simpler to say and I can’t explain in details anyway). That’s because (from wiki):

It is widely believed that the (computable) numbers √2, π, and e are normal, but a proof remains elusive.

I think, they don’t mean lossless compression with LLM, but with a neural network in general. I think it might be possible, but I’m not sure

It is recognisable, with that I agree

Are there any other languages that would also have Json.Stringify? I only read JS sometimes and never write those, so I may be wrong about that.

JSON itself is fine, yeah

I mean, the meme could’ve been ‘oh, it’s JS, shoot me’

It looks to me that it is either Forth, or implementation specific, not RPN in general. But then again, the meme is about Forth, not RPN

Well, scamming was plain English hacking before the invention of electricity, so maybe we’re just back to the basics

Yeah, some of the ‘hacking’ allegation are amazing, so maybe we will one day see ‘my agent was asked to drop database by a page I was scraping without permission’ lawsuits.

I expected it to be a jest, but they look serious. It might even not be too bad of a language in other circumstances

Yeah, there are 10 types of people

To be fair, this is what bothers me more than the supposedly non-existent benefits, because I’ve seen LLMs being useful as tools, but the impact on environment is not clearly communicated (I’d wager it’s because no one wants to admit that it’s enormous). For that reason I’m trying to use local LLM instead, and it is more limited in usefulness but that’s fine by me as it’s not the only tool I have