> - Descriptions of flags, unless there are lots of them.
> - An instruction to pass the --help flag for more information.
I disagree with this. The first 3 points should all unconditionally be in the man page of the program. In my ideal scenario, the jq short help message would omit everything after the "Usage" section except for the message to run the command with --help.
But the goal isn't to catalogue all human knowledge. Having an article for every living person would be "cataloguing all human knowledge" but it would also be a meaningless endeavour. Some knowledge is worth preserving in an encyclopedia, other knowledge isn't. That is why they have their notability guidelines.
Right before the statement in Wikipedia being an ideological playground:
> Our best hypothesis is quite simple: some of the mods just don't like Odin as a language and don't want it on Wikipedia as any form of "advertisement".
It doesn't directly say "political bias", but it certainly is implied (not as in national politics, more like ideological)
> But the tech giant says it kept operational carbon emissions down by continuing to purchase massive amounts of clean energy.
I never got this line of reasoning. If you are using 37% energy and you buy it from providers of clean energy, doesn't that mean that someone else won't be able to use that energy and will have to use fossil fuels anyways? It's the equivalent of "reducing" a country's emissions by forcing companies to move to a country where they ARE allowed to pollute and just importing the produce from there.
By cheating you gain a certificate that says you can do things which you cannot. The difference between cheating in university and forging a degree is the time it takes.
When going to a doctor, you wouldn't want them to have cheated for their exams during training. You expect them to be well equipped to practice medicine and to ensure you get correct diagnoses and care. When hiring a programmer or software engineer, you should expect them to be able to provide you a proper, well architected application given the requirements.
Except that brotli uses Huffman coding. It's main claim to fame is using higher order statistics to select a Huffman table and its built-in dictionary.
This class of compression programs sees larger differences due to the way the data is modelled instead of the specific entropy coder used.
Which slice? The large text compression benchmark uses enwik8 for a "smaller" input that is easily reproducible. The predictability of enwik9 can vary significantly depending on where in the file you are, as shown by Matt Mahoney https://www.mattmahoney.net/dc/textdata.html
It depends on the format. Brotli switches the Huffman codes used based on the previously decoded bytes, but gzip and bzip2 for example use the same Huffman codes for a bigger block of data. But even then, there might be some more details that you'd need to work out, like the decoding of LZ offsets.
Another interesting one is the ZPAQ compression program[1]. It is one of the top performers on the large text compression benchmark[2] and uses the bytecode to specify how to model the data.
I made a program with some inline assembly and tried O3 with clang once. Because the assembly was in a loop, the compiler probably didn't have enough information on the actual code and decided to fully unroll all 16 iterations, making performance drop by 25% because the cache locality was completely destroyed. What I'm trying to say, is that loop unrolling is definitely not a guarantee for faster code in exchange for binary size
> I don't know about survival bias. LLMs are well suited to this task of taking in this cloud of soft data like a description of symptoms and spitting out a potential diagnosis.
And it will do so confidently and incorrectly. A single description of symptoms from a patient is very unlikely to be enough. This is why doctors are there to ask follow-up questions and do examinations. Symptoms alone can describe a dozen different illnesses.
I read a while back that bzip2 is named that way because the original bzip used arithmetic coding. The person who made bzip then made bzip2 to use Huffman coding due to patent problems with arithmetic coding.
> I know this position is wrong, but it feels hard to spend my time on something that someone else might not have spent the time to create
I don't think that position is wrong. I felt similarly when tutoring a high-school student recently. They didn't do any work themselves, they were forced by their parent to come to me two days before a test. I offered to help, but when I realized that the student didn't care enough to study by themselves, I basically lost all motivation to help them.
It feels the same with AI-generated content. If the "creator" didn't care to spend time on it, why should I spend mine?
> - A description of what your program does.
> - One or two example invocations.
> - Descriptions of flags, unless there are lots of them.
> - An instruction to pass the --help flag for more information.
I disagree with this. The first 3 points should all unconditionally be in the man page of the program. In my ideal scenario, the jq short help message would omit everything after the "Usage" section except for the message to run the command with --help.