I am settling on a way of working where during the day I spent the time iterating requirements, designs and low level implementation plans for, say, a dozen features, and then I park them for an unattended build during the night. It works well.
What, if not communism, is Zohran Mamdani up to in New York talking about opening government run grocery stores that he says will undercut the market by 30%.
Most people build C in g++ before gcc, as it tends to have a better chance of catching most oddities. Then run it past valgrind to double check if something looks suspect or is slowly leaking. =3
>If they can use the information from my past interactions with them to provide a better service to me, that seems fine.
They can also use this data to understand how much further they can raise prices, and how much further they can degrade quality, before losing you as a customer, projecting that over their entire customer base to ensure they are providing the least their customer base will accept.
This is the facebook model, figuring out how much damage to the signal:noise ratio the average punter will accept before leaving.
On large codebases, literally anything I throw at Fable or Opus takes at least 20 minutes, 10 of those minutes is spent on running test suites. With this way of working, I put way more emphasis on test coverage, integration tests, behavioral tests, in-browser tests -- and I run them on every change, before any commit. Faster CPU solves this, while faster inference solves the other 10 minutes. I can't imagine how cool it would be to work with this ultrafast mode, without those mental-context-purging pauses.
Awesome review, but afaict if you need app XYZ, and your cool phone doesn't have it, then you have to have a 2nd phone that supports app XYZ.
Or you have to make a concerted effort to use only the web interface version, if it exists (which has a lot of merits on its own). However, a tiny minority of products are "app only".
Or the app gives unique functionality. You can't scan a check with a web interface of your bank.
I saw that go by on YC two days ago, and it scrolled off fast enough I can't find it. They were talking specifically about AI tools, as in avoiding harnesses and letting the LLM do more of the job.
I think the presumption of harassment is a little telling, but if your post was in good faith, merely advertising people's cars (as in the group pays for ad space etc) freely and legally very much like the musk plane tracking app would have the desired effect
- i can add and subtract 7 digit numbers effortlessly now
- i am still working on multiplication and division though but we ll get there slowly
- let me give you an example live
2949745
-
2947648
- my thought process to do this goes like this
- 1st 3 digits are same ignore
9745
-
7648
- 2nd step is to round off 9700 - 7700 = 2000, add 45 to it and it makes 2045 , we are still 52 short, add 50 to it and make it 2095, now add 2 and it becomes 2097
- see? no calculator needed
- i can do this faster than you can type the numbers above inside your beloved calculator
I can't find a clear argument from data to dispute what your point, which is good and very plausible, but I also can't find one to substantiate it. What I can say is that most likely homeless women are subject at higher rates to the types of assaults that are more likely to cause PTSD, presumably this would also include transgender MtF and similar groups. For male homeless people the data does not substantiate high enough rates of being exposed the the types of experiences more likely to cause PTSD.
However, female and intersex/trans people are a very small percent of the homeless population. So while PTSD is statistically plausible within that sub-group, we are now taking a moderate percentage that would get PTSD from exposure to a potentially triggering event (say 15%), with a small percentage exposed to that event, among a very small percent of homeless people overall. Just giving this the highest numbers I can substantiate in your favor, it would produce 1.2% to 1.5% of the overall homeless population developing PTSD from triggers that are statistically due to homelessness PER YEAR (aka you can be raped if you have a home, but you are more likely to be raped if you do not have a home). This would accumulate to 4-6% out of about 25-50% prevalence of the PTSD cases found in homeless people. This is significant, so your theory is plausible given the available data.
However it would still mean that PTSD is 5-10 times more likely to cause homelessness, overwhelmingly due it's contribution to rates of hard drug addiction, than it is to be caused BY homelessness.
HN in general has completely misunderstood app verification. App verification is what allows rival app stores to be installed without a warning, even if they aren't installed from a system app store. It is a direct result of this ruling.
It's still possible to install any app with a warning. A future Google Android build will require developer mode to be enabled to install those apps. That is the problem to address, not app verification, which will be rolled out as a Google Play Services update to existing Google Android builds and makes it strictly easier to install apps than before.
Unless they are experimentally inducing this effect (which I doubt, as it would be unethical to induce memory loss), this is all correlation. Biological correlation.
This isn't causation. Turning 50 doesn't trigger anything. Whatever happens is happening due to other factors, and they're tracking it in, predominantly, 50ish year olds.
Correlation isn't causation last time I checked. Even biological ones.
I expected the pathetic excuse for the nuclear genocide of the two Japanese cities. The real reason was to frighten the Soviets. Not going to waste my time on this aspect any more: educating the wilfully ignorant and propagandised is not my job.
The US triggered the Iraq/Iran war. Not just that, they supplied Saddam with precursors for chemical weapons. Later used the same as an excuse to depose him.
Real reason for attacking every oil rich country is always oil.
The real world knows exactly what the US is, thanks to President Trump's honesty in being a war criminal. Unlike the series of war criminals preceding him. Including the precious Obama.
> [...] instead of accidentally linking ordinary C into it
Out of curiosity. If you really needed to, could a language speak both the C ABI and the Fil-C ABI? As I understand Fil-C itself can't do this without having Python-like FFI overhead, but maybe a different compiler implementation could?
That's a different tarpit. That's the problem with object-relation mapping, which is trying to deal with the mismatch between structs in languages and rows in SQL. There are a huge number of such schemes, and they range from somewhat annoying to awful. They're bad across a broad range of programming languages.
This is an area where LLMs might actually help. Or make things worse. We'll have to see.
