[-] sacredfire@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago

Agreed. If you are not incompetent, you will remember the stuff that you use often. You will know exactly where to look to refresh your memory for things you use infrequently, and when you do need to look something up, you will understand the solution and why it’s correct. Being good at looking things up, is like half the job.

[-] sacredfire@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

A lot of audiophile gear is overpriced bs. See what audio engineers use for mixing/mastering. Ath, Sennheiser, etc. Good cans will cost you anywhere from $150 to $600 but anything for thousands of dollars is ridiculous.

[-] sacredfire@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago

I personally don’t think that’s the issue with the typing system. With vanilla js if I’m looking at a function that has say four parameters that are not trivial objects like strings but are actually complex (think dependency injection) it’s very difficult for me to know what these objects are other than reading through the code of the function.

Actually, even if the parameters are simple, I’m not sure of that until I look into the function and see what it’s doing. This is a huge pain in the ass most the time, because I just wanna look at the function name its parameters and move on. However, that being said, most of this can be remedied with jsdocs and a good linter/lsp.

[-] sacredfire@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

The real problem is that across the globe there is like 50 different implementations of it. Some places have a fucking half hour, or some goofy shit. Really fun handling time zones with that sprinkled on top.

[-] sacredfire@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago

By this same logic we can exclude the possibility of simulation theory, no? By your own logic it's not a stretch to "exclude the possibility" of something "because it’s a possibility that we can’t observe by any means". I believe goes back to the point of the meme: self proclaimed logical actors believing in something unprovable and thus proving themselves to be hypocrites...

[-] sacredfire@programming.dev 1 points 9 months ago

But at that point, isn't that no different than just saying the universe isn't a simulation? If there is a base universe than that is the "actual" universe, and who cares about all the simulations beyond what we would care about a simulation we created? For this to be the case, I feel like there would need to be some additional features or complexities about this base universe that can't be simulated and thus that allows those in it to prove that they are not a simulation. The issue the simulation universes have is that if they could create a simulation of their own universe they are immediately confronted with the conundrum that they themselves are probably not the first one to do this. But this theoretical base universe would have some characteristic about it that precluded them from this issue. Or maybe they don't, maybe they think they're simulation too but they're not and have no way to prove otherwise, they just happen to be the base. However, if that is the case, then you can make that same argument for this universe can't you?

[-] sacredfire@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Why does a pre-trained model need expensive private hardware after it was trained, other than to handle API requests faster? Is Open AI training chat-GPT on inferior hardware compared to these sophisticated private versions you mentioned?

view more: ‹ prev next ›

sacredfire

joined 1 year ago