A lot of christians will start a "Bible In One Year" program at the beginning of the year. Kind of like the gym resolution. Sometimes it will take a few years to read the whole Bible, and then you start the cycle again. There's lots of different plans out there.
It's fine to add the books, when you do, I hope the elegant way gives one the option to enable/disable them. Otherwise you're probably going to miss out on one audience or the other.
Yes, Jeff told me this one personally. Knuth came in right before the talk started and the room was full. I think somebody later gave up a seat for him.
It probably is. I think the same thing happened when Randall Munroe (of xkcd fame) gave a talk at Google. I was there, it was crowded, and Don Knuth showed up. 90% sure he sat on the floor.
Friends and I nabbed front-row seats to the Munroe talk; after a time we were asked to take seats a few rows back to make room for Knuth and others. He definitely did not sit on the floor.
FWIW the XKCD talk at Google is here (wow, 18 years ago! I remember watching this video when it was posted): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJOS0sV2a24 (Knuth comes up to ask a question at 21:30) (Can't tell from the video where he was sitting otherwise, though there are definitely at least some people sitting on the floor.)
i do feel the ecosystem isn't broad enough for linux to become consumer facing. E.g., if you buy a random chinese made writing tablet and tried using it on linux, it has less than even chance of working straight out the box.
Similarly with bluetooth, wifi (for laptops), etc.
The problem is that OEM are locked into windows, so you have the chicken/egg problem where OEM won't want to spend effort on linux compatibility without a large customer base, and customer base won't grow unless they know for sure it is always going to work for _any_ piece of hardware they might purchase.
May be steam machine and valve could be the push it needs to establish a large customer base.
I'm so sorry for your loss. My wife went through a difficult but successful birth of our first daughter, and I cannot watch or read about births without involuntarily welling up. I pray your family will be comforted and that the new year will bring better tidings!
Yes they are, or rather, we were when I was in primary school. My essays (we called them composition) were filled with these these red check marks for every esoteric word, proverb, metaphor or simile you used. The more you had the higher you'd score. So I did my homework with a dictionary open. I remember writing some document at work in the US and everyone commenting on how Queen's English it was. This was before ChatGPT. I know know it was all silly, and I've spent a bunch of time learning to write simply. But then I've listen to too many tech podcasts, and now I find silicon valley tech-speak creeping in, and I hate it. The one that I hear everywhere now that I swear not to ever use is let's double-click on that point. Just why?
You write a record to disk before applying it to your in-memory state. If you crash, you replay the log and recover. Done. Except your disk is lying to you.
This is why people who've lost data in production are paranoid about durability. And rightfully so.
Why this matters: Hardware bit flips happen. Disk firmware corrupts data. Memory busses misbehave. And here's the kicker: None of these trigger an error flag.
Together, they mean: "I know this is slower. I also know I actually care about durability."
This creates an ordering guarantee without context switches. Both writes complete before we return control to the application. No race conditions. No reordering.
... I only got about halfway through. This is just phrasing, forget about the clickbaity noun-phrase subheads or random boldface.
None of these are representative (I hope!) of the kind of "sophisticated" writing meant to reinforce class distinctions or whatever. It's just blech LinkedIn-speak.
I agree. I think the point here was the self-appointed AI detectives, who will declare any writing style unfamiliar to them a product of ChatGPT. You might remember the Paul Graham "delve-gate" controversy on twitter last year. It was exactly this.
Yeah. But I will die on the hill that ChatGPT (today, at least) is a bad writer, and makes prompted writing worse in a way that isn't anything like the way schematic style or vocabulary rules might for an over-eager student.
For whatever combination of prompt and context, ChatGPT 5.2 did some writing for me the other day that didn't have any of the surface style I find so abrasive. But it could still only express its purported insights in the same "A & ~B" structure and other GPT-isms beneath the surface. Truly effective writers are adept with a much broader set of rhetorical and structural tools.
But this was also just a short-lived political environment as well, where companies pretended to care about the current thing because it was politically expedient. How long did it take for them to do a 180? I mean they didn't believe in any of that stuff even a little.
I get that. But I think the AI-deriders are a bit nuts sometimes because while I’m not running around crying about AGI… it’s really damn nice to change the arguments of a function and have it just go everywhere and adjust every invocation of that function to work properly. Something that might take me 10-30 minutes is now seconds and it’s not outside of its reliability spectrum.
reply