> It surprises me that the compiler doesn't still take the inference from the assert and just disable emitting the code to perform the check.
The compiler isn't as clever as I think you're envisioning: assert() only works that way because it exits the control flow if the statement isn't true.
Hi! A small DIY project I built while experimenting with a 1.25" round display and Raspberry Pi Pico boards. It’s a customizable “prophecy” device inspired by the Magic 8 Ball, with programmable responses and room for extensions. Would love any feedback or ideas!
Because there are other factors at play. No-till is mostly about sustainability of farming. Humans often don't optimize for the most sustainable option but for the option that's most profitable (or perceived to be most profitable) _right now_.
Tilling and using crazy amounts of mineral fertilizer definitely improves yields. But it will, in the long term, also kill agriculture to a large extent if we're not careful. We're not talking about highly speculative outcomes here: The data is pretty clear and everyone with even a large pot and some soil can run the same experiment at home and come to the same conclusions.
Farmers need to survive, they need to earn money, they will obviously optimize for short-term yield. We shouldn't judge them for this, but we _should_ find ways to solve the issue, ideally together with farmers.
Except that when its system prompt is full of instructions, caveats, design principles, gotchas, architecture notes, memories from the past, and personal preferences, at some point it's going to just ignore them outright. Heck, Claude Code won't even use critical instructions from a 100-line CLAUDE.md file sometimes. So you still have to be extremely vigilant about noncompliance.
The concept of "selling out" requires you to have some core values which you and your audience share. If you're a hard rock band and you make a cringe disco album because that's what the record label told you to do, that could be seen as selling out. If you're an anarchist crust punk and you get signed to a big label that could be selling out. If you're an underground DJ and you do the soundtrack for a big movie that could be selling out.
I don't think most music artists have the necessary relationship with their audience to "sell out", because their music isn't ideological and they don't have a real relationship with their fans. As famous sell-out Laura Jane Grace sang, the content is so easily attainable that the culture is disposable.
A general rule of thumb is when you switch corn from to to notill for the first seven years yields will be worse, but in the eighth year and after they are better.
And some have been saying that RAGs are obsolete—that the context window of a modern LLM is adequate (preferable?). The example I recently read was that the contexts are large enough for the entire "The Lord of the Rings" books.
That may be, but then there's an entire law library, the entirety of Wikipedia (and the example in this article of 451 GB). Surely those are at least an order of magnitude larger than Tolkien's prose and might still benefit from a RAG.
I think that writers may stop using "It's not x, it's y" analogies in their writings because every time they do, someone calls it out for being AI. Same with "Em Dashes" and such.
Across domains like AI, social platforms, and institutions, there’s a recurring pattern where optimization improves metrics but degrades real-world alignment. This diagram tries to visualize that shared failure mode.
The issue here isn’t that we’re asking for donations. The massive banner is significantly impairing usability. It’s wrong to ask for donations at the expense of usability.
The Beach Boys also unabashedly liked money. I saw The Beach Boys - what was left of them anyway - with one the original members talking on stage basically talking about how he still did touring because he liked driving around in a Bentley.
It's open source so I'm sure there is a way. But maybe then the enterprise deployments can't depend on the freely provided binaries and hosting associated, and will have to build the project themselves and handle distribution.
Compaction is sublinear with weight, make the tractor heavier so it combacts more makes a small difference where the tires are - but you can now pull something bigger (assuming horsepower) and that means less of the field is touched by tires and in turn less compaction. compaction is worse where the tires touch but they touch less.
the above is also why tires are better than tracks in many cases. The tire has more compaction, but when you turn it touches less land and so overall is better than a track.
of course every soil is different. For details of you particular land you need an expert who knows your soil.
> it is really fearmongering when the systemd people literally founded a company to develop attestation for linux?
Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they intend to force this on you without any way of disabling it, or that they have already done so? Because unless they plan to do this (and you have concrete proof of such and not just "well they could do this" claims) or they have already done it across a significant portion of the Linux distribution ecosystem (and no, distros voluntarily switching to systemd is not forcing anyone to do anything), this is fearmongering. Simple as that.
> We all start with an idea, 0 customers, 0 followers
wat. No, this is not true at all. Most successful startups work through many ideas until they already have potential customers to work with as they build. And if the idea doesn't come together and prove that is can generate revenue, people don't build it. They move on.
This idea that someone has a vision that nobody else has bought into and turn it into a startup unicorn is a rare exception to how things go. It makes a good story, but isn't how thing play out in reality 99% of the time. Don't fall into the trap of thinking the other 1% is a reasonable expectation of how your idea will go.
I was applying recently to a role that was pretty interesting and so I wrote the email on the train on my way home, didn't have my laptop with me.
In the email I wrote out everything myself, absolutely no use of AI, but after I hit send I realised there was a pretty silly typo, nothing grave but it irked me.
I decided out of boredom to see would my email be considered AI as it was probably going to go through a million filters these days, I popped it into an online checker (I don't know the quality of these so who knows) and it told me with 75% certainty it was written by AI.
It was not at all. It was written overly hastily on a phone on public transport.
So I wonder how someone who might be grammar orientated and particular with the semantics would prove otherwise.
I can see a company needing to find any excuse to let people go saying "well theAI says you used the AI to do your work, we're letting you go"
Total GDP increasing isn't a good measure of economic growth or productivity because it doesn't distinguish between productive value creation and money just changing hands. If I cut your hair and charge $50 and you cut my hair and charge $50 then $100 is added to the GDP. Sure, value is created by the transaction, but value would be created if no money changed hands at all thus not even affecting the GDP! GDP can also rise even as most people are doing poorly. A billionaire buying a superyacht adds the same amount to the GDP as 500 families buying their first home. You can have a growing GDP even in a society where the top .1% have 99% of the wealth, but that's not a society I'd want to live in.
