mzan @mzan@social.cleverlibre.org
@freemo oh no, I cannot stomach another SJW debate about differences between male and female meat 🙂
@freemo it is a simulation, and there are hints of Moore's Law applied to Life-Hardware-Simulator!
IMHO, it is not completely unrelated from how we interact with inanimate objects too. We try to be "emphatic" with the tool, in the sense that we try to manage it in the way it should be managed. We know when we are "gentle" with it, or when we are using it outside its limits, and stressing it.
When I speak to ChatGPT, I think to some tensors, and I imagine that if I'm kind and I give positive feedback when it is on the right path, then there are less doubts in it, and it can explore further in the right direction, because it knows that it is the correct path. If it is not understanding what I mean, the discussion can become more "rude" and stressful, but in this case it can be a positive "stress", because it helps to be on the same page. Like with normal people.
So there is a very high correlation between how we should talk to a real person and to ChatGPT in an effective way. We are anthropomorphism LLM, but often because this is the correct way to use this tool, up to date.
Said this, there are for sure people that interact with ChatGPT, believing it is a real self conscious entity, and not only the best way to use the tool.
"Within Gaza City, the population density is over 500 people per 100 square meters in many sections, according to data from the European Commission."
It is not credible that Isrelian soldiers will advance to the target, without self-defense. And self-defence in a city with this density, it is for sure a lot of civil deaths.
@realcaseyrollins your reasoning can be correct if the building to reach is near the border with Israel. But, if the troups had to reach a palace in the center of Gaza, it can be a very long "journey".
@freemo We can choose between quick and self-proclaimed Hamas terrorism, or long-term, hypocritical Israelian one. :-/
I'm not an expert, but my 2cents are that without an external arbitration committee, this dispute will never be solved.
@jackdaniel "Common Lisp" is an odd language. They should called it "Norm Lisp" 🙂
@jackdaniel your usage of even terms elder and scion is odd 🙂
@freemo I don't like the layout. In particular, I will put the most important info first, on the left.
I will group sections by personal, work, project, hobby, etc... and not by emails, websites and so on.
@freemo the problem of a "deep nuanced quality conversation" is that it will be very brief: "We are destroying the planet, without an effective plan for avoiding this".
We live in an hypocritical time. We are surrounded from lies, and we know they are lies. Journalists are like the musicians of Titanic.
@freemo please... you used "stars" instead of "dots", and this can hurt the sensibility of astigmatic people! 😃
mzan
boosted
🇳🇱
Remember people, being politicially incorrect is good for your health with all of the following benefits:
* No constant stress about what you say
* All of the most toxic and judgemental people will hate you enough to not be around you.
* The people who want to be around you will be fun, good, non-toxic people
* You dont have to deal with constant drama over nonsense
* You live a live of quality, not quantity.
@rml as I already said, #chez uses Nanopass, that is a Scheme DSL where you specify: layers of intermediate code representations (IR); small and composable compilation pass on/between them.
Thanks to this approach, #chez source code is one of the shortest and more readable compilers on the planet, despite it produces very fast compiled code for Scheme that is a language difficult to compile in an efficient way.
#chez is a clear example that if you use the right paradigm (i.e. Nanopass DSL), then the problem became easier.
@freemo they found that: case A) the experiment costs zero; case B) the experiment halted because each twin tried to blackmail the other twin in an infinite loop of greediness.
@PaniczGodek maybe Scheme88 that is an implementation of Scheme in CL, or "BBN Butterfly Common Lisp" that is an implementation of CL in Scheme.
@PaniczGodek a first time project started in Scheme, before discovering that Common Lisp is better 🙂
@freemo the question started as funny, but if I think better, I touch during the day/week nearly every part of my body. It is a sort of checkup. If there is something of strange, I will notice it.
Said this, I agree that there is an excess of attention towards the junk 🙂
you are lucky: @hayley worked on the SBCL GC, so she can answer.
My 2cents are that, apart the GC, CL gives you a lot of power for optimizing memory management because: with MOP you can customize the memory layout of CLOS objects; if performances are important, you can work on big-chunk of data, stored in arrays, and here CL can give you a lot of options for specifying their format. In both cases, you are reducing the work for the GC, because you have less objects, and you can control (at least partially) how they are stored.
It is a lot of power, that few PL offers.
> That said, I see no reason why all of these different runtimes couldn't be implemented in a version of Lisp that used Rust-like memory management,
The concept of run-time is wider than a Rust-like "minimum common denominator".
A DBMS with its index types and its query plans is a "run-time". It offers various operations with specific cost-models.
The BEAM with its fine-grained concurrency is a run-time minimizing latency, but with rather limited bandwidth (they are working on a JIT). If you try to call C libraries into BEAM code, you increase bandwidth but you can ruin totally the latency aspects, and you can block services. So, you had to implement the BEAM in Rust, instead of C, but it will be a BEAM run-time, not a Rust run-time.
Linux kernel BPF code is an ad-hoc high-level managed language that can be compiled to efficient code, taking in account also all other submitted BPF fragments submitted by various applications. If you give to this language all the power of Rust, the kernel cannot check and optimize it.
GPU has its specific run-time, and the code must follow a certain paradigm.
The run-time can be affected by the characteristics of the hardware and/or of the problem domain. For the programmer, it is usually a simplified model from which you can derive the approximate cost of operations; the error that are signaled; etc...
We live in a multi-paradigm and multi-runtime world. We cannot escape this.
