palebluethought

@palebluethought@lemmy.world
0 Post – 28 Comments
Joined 12 months ago

So, let's put aside for a moment the rather shocking number of people casually advocating for murder in this thread.

I want to talk instead about how everyone here is just talking for granted the notion that removing the billionaires, Republican politicians, or whatever "they" you care to think of, would be a solution, or even a positive step, for modern social ills.

There's a big undercurrent in almost any political discussion online, this implication that every one of the world's problems actually has a super simple solution, that The Powerful could just snap their fingers and make it happen if they wanted to, and it's only because of their greed etc that we have any problems that all. Obviously we live in a time of huge inequity and we'd be a lot better off if we found a good way to improve it.

But many (most?) of our biggest problems are inherent to the challenge of keeping 8 billion people alive and happy in a hostile universe, and in fact nobody has ever had a perfect solution. Throwing the entire planet into chaos by causally throwing away human beings' rights and leaving an enormous portion of the world's capital in uncertain hands, ready to be seized by some other set of psychopathic opportunists who happen to be in a position to do so, certainly ain't it.

Other than maybe a few very rote, boilerplate types of development, all this shit about replacing coders is almost entirely noise made by either the wishful thinking of oligarchs or credulous repetition of that wishful thinking by clueless journalists.

But it's still a pretty rough time to be just getting into tech, just because of the state of the job market.

9 more...

In addition to what others said, the way you perceive light intensity is not linear. Between your eye adjusting to changing light levels and just the way your brains visual centers work, it's closer to logarithmic. Indoor lighting at night probably feels like, what, 10% of the brightness of daylight? In reality it's less than 1%, sometimes closer to 0.1%.

Everyone is talking about dominant and recessive genes, so I just want to clarify a couple things.

The way your body directly uses genes is as a blueprint to construct proteins. Your cells are always producing proteins from the genes in all your chromosomes. It has complex ways of regulating how much of each it produces, but your body doesn't care what chromosome it's coming from. Once an embryo is fertilized, there's really no distinction between "mom" chromosomes or "dad" chromosomes, as far as the embryo and its protein machinery are concerned.

"Dominant" and "recessive" characterization is about how those proteins affect your body at the macro scale, not whether your body actually uses the gene and produces its proteins -- it always does that. For example, brown hair is a dominant trait, and blonde is recessive. But this is because producing any amount of brown pigment will make your hair brown, regardless of what other pigments you're making, simply because it's darker. Literally the same as combining blonde and brown paint. It has nothing to do with whether the genes are actually being expressed -- the brown hair gene doesn't stop the blonde hair gene from making its pigments.

4 more...

Uh... Ask, I guess?

4 more...

"digestible" and "nutritious" aren't social constructs, so no. If your body can transform it chemically in a way that produces energy, it's food. Otherwise it's not. The same things are food regardless of your culture.

1 more...

Can we also talk about how absurd that picture at the bottom of the login page is? It looks like something a warez site would have as its landing page in like 2003. Made by some guy named xXx_l33tz3r0_xXx

2 more...

Your premise is wrong in like... A bunch of ways. We sure as shit do not live in a post-scarcity society lol

41 more...

Why would anyone stop using those standards? You seem very confused about the incentives for adopting standards. Sure, maybe US-driven standards were chosen over other possibilities partly because of political environment, but once you have a perfectly good standard adopted you're not just going to throw it out because the original author isn't cool anymore. You don't need a dominant power to adopt standards.

And for being "slightly political" and "focused on the standards," your post sure does spend the majority of its time talking about only politics and not about standards at all

This -- I think this is probably starting to die out already, but there was a massive wave of startups whose "product" basically amounts to a prompt template that they fill in with your input and pass along to ChatGPT. Any early stage startup getting plugged on HN or whatever, you can assume there's at least a 60% chance it's pure smoke and mirrors, and that percentage only climbs the more buzzwords it includes.

I'm really trying to make this one make sense, but it's just not happening. Can you rephrase?

I don't really know what "original use" would mean -- most emojis aren't really made with some specific usage in mind, they're just pictograms. The use is to be able to show a skull when you wanna

It's still lemmy, but the mander.xyz instance is exactly this for science

The bashrc poisoning thing was sarcastic. the point is it's not important as an attack vector because if that's even part of your surface area, then the attacker is already pretty well into your system

"uncommon" is an overstatement, you can get them pretty much anywhere that has pots and pans. It's uncommon in that most people don't bother owning one, not that they're hard to get

For the most part, they're not specifically supporting the Israeli government. They have endowment funds, which they invest in mutual funds and other such financial instruments, like everyone else. Those mutual funds, in turn, invest money in a huge array of different stocks, bonds, etc, generally with the goal of producing a decent return with a minimum amount of risk. Buried somewhere in that pile of investments are things like Israeli government bonds, shares in defense contractors, etc, because political priorities are not usually a factor in how mutual funds decide where to put their money.

Sure, but now you're talking about running a physical simulation of neurons. Real neurons aren't just electrical circuits. Not only do they evolve rapidly over time, they're powerfully influenced by their chemical environment, which is controlled by your body's other systems, and so on. These aren't just minor factors, they're central parts of how your brain works.

Yes, in principle, we can (and have, to some extent) run physical simulations of neurons down to the molecular resolution necessary to accomplish this. But the computational power required to do that is massively, like billions of times, more expensive than the "neural networks" we have today, which are really just us anthropomorphizing a bunch of matrix multiplication.

It's simply not feasible to do this at a scale large enough to be useful, even with all the computation on Earth.

Now you'll have a zillion users trying to install software in ways that violate all the assumptions that NixOS operates on, but which are still tightly coupled to your NixOS config. Now updates to your system, or even seemingly unrelated config changes (through some transitive dependency chain) can easily break that software.

So now we've basically removed half the advantages that motivate Nix/OS in the first place, and when stuff breaks it will look like it's Nix's fault, even if it isn't.

On the other hand, nixpkgs is already the most comprehensive repository of system software out there, and for 99% of packages Nixifying it is pretty trivial. Hell, my NixOS config does that for 3 different GitHub repos right inline in my config.nix

The size of the code is mostly irrelevant if you're not shipping it to clients over the network on every request. Short of truly gargantuan statically-linked binaries in compiled languages, anyway, and bundling isn't really an applicable concept there. And similarly, the overhead of loading modules from the filesystem is a one-time cost that's mostly irrelevant for server-side code that runs for days or weeks or years at a time.

On the other hand, the complexity overhead of adding the additional bundling step is a major drag on development productivity, debuggability, etc.

2 more...

If your system uses 3 different Pythons as dependencies of different packages, which one gets to be /usr/bin/python?

8 more...

Given the explosive growth in the last month, I have to imagine the devs are just trying to keep their heads above water at the moment. Give it a few more months and I imagine a lot more SWE Lemmy users will jump on board and help out

I've blocked multiple hundreds of communities, so if there is it's high enough to not matter much

Not sure about 1, but 2 and 3 both have the same answer. Both TSInstall and Mason are just trying to install other software packages on your system, and you're on NixOS, so of course they can't do that. You don't install your software, you declare it. Add the Treesitter parsers you need right next to your plugins (there is a sub collection under the vimPlugins collection just for Treesitter parsers), and put whatever Mason would be installing into your user packages instead.

That said, I agree with the other commenter. Even though the community has done a lot of work on rich config options for Neovim, they're just too far away from the normal way of doing things in the Neovim world, and plenty of plugins are written in ways that assume it's configured in "normal" ways. Plus configuring Neovim is already kinda like assembling your own car from parts in any case, so it's honestly better to just use nix to install Lazyvim or whatever flavor of choice and let it handle the plugin management/config. And believe me, I really tried to do it all in Nix, I wanted to do it that way. But it's just not worth the headache at this point

1 more...

+1, in the US Whatsapp is the thing you download when you're traveling abroad, and has no other presence at all

Perhaps "always-on display" is clearer? Keeps it from turning off when idle

1 more...

Lambda is certainly an interesting case for this, I'll give you that. Outside of that, though, the impact on deployment speed is also not relevant; the bottlenecks for deployment are things like CI, canarying, even rolling blackout windows across AZs, etc. The actual time spent transmitting your build artifact over the network is completely negligible even at huge sizes

All of the configuration options you're specifying there are for the nextcloud NixOS module, it's not a magical part of Nix itself. Same with the self and other arguments at the top. Outside of NixOS (and home-manager, for user-level installations), all Nix is going to be able to do for you is build software, it cannot do runtime configuration or other alterations to your system like that.

Yeah, it has all the same problems that (pre-Musk) Twitter did. Centralization was never the problem, turns out. IMO it's just the basic central premise that everyone is talking to everyone, all the time. When your brain does that, it's called a seizure.

Plus tons and tons of furries, which like... you do you, but it becomes a huge ongoing effort just to keep furry porn out of a lot of the feeds, if that's not your bag.

2 more...