Hmm if a particle is a quantized packet of a field, then if multiple quantizations are possible in a field, then it's possible for more particles than fields?
People reach for the things you mentioned wayyyyyy before they should.
Just because you want something queue shaped or search, doesn't mean you should reach for the big, specialized, expensive technology, when Postgres can already support it in your existing infrastructure up until some significant scale you often won't surpass.
2. Regarding the title... you can definitely prompt them to be dumber, clearly. We know performance can be improved via prompts, from "baseline" performance. So this is a weird title.
Earlier this year I was told I failed an interview because when asked why I wanted to join a company, my answer "could apply to other companies in the same stage of life." They apparently required me to be _uniquely_ interested in their company. There were other oddities about their interview process.
I recommend installing Omarchy and playing with it. Read through the Omarchy repo to see how the things you liked and disliked were set up.
Then install arch or Cachy or some other Arch based distro and just use the parts you liked.
I am completely disinterested in the author's concerns because Omarchy was useful to me in demonstrating how to compose pieces into a useful whole in a relatively minimalist distribution like Arch. It is much easier to learn with good examples than just only reading DIY reference docs. (And they are good examples even if you dislike the targets of the apps installed - I agree on those points, but they're just not that important)
On both points, sure, trivially, if I do not value property or the rule of law, I will not care about destroying it. But obviously we're talking about the moral value of the implications more than the direct value of the camera. Do keep up.
On the second point specifically, that's actually much more interesting! If one values the rule of law, then you would actually want your laws to be morally aligned! Otherwise, the conflict of the law with morality _devalues_ the rule of law. Valuing rule of law does not imply only some sort of legalistic value of laws unto themselves, but of the value of a society with good laws, enforced well. This incentivizes analysis and evolution _of the law_ and, to some degree, forcing conflict to bring about those changes.
Those are fairly indistinguishable. It's when they start removing letters from words to save... debug symbol bytes or something? That's when c-style naming annoys me.
Nitor - a discord clone with a shared/federated Identity layer, but self-hosted "servers/guilds". Trust model is to trust the guild server (e.g., so private channels work as one would expect with moderation capabilities), but to enable E2E DMs and friend/presence systems via guild servers as relays. Rust, Iced, Iroh.
Glyphcraft - a Minecraft mod (imagine if Thaumcraft, Ars Nouveau, and Hex Casting were smashed together)
Fuck no! Of course he can't be trusted. We know that. Nobody questions that. We know that about most of the "elites" running the show.
We're just in this shitty pit of despair where people are desperate. It's difficult to campaign for good when you're struggling and capital can jerk people around.
People pursue good for the sake of good at cost to themselves when times are very good or times are very, very bad.
Mastodon, Bluesky, etc are neat - both in what they're trying to be and their technology. But ultimately these days I reject them in favor of more local socialization (again, not geographically). What this looks like is a constellation of private (or pseudo private) discord communities. If I make friends in one, I often get invited to another. I recognize the merit in broader social forums like Mastodon, but it is not worth the drawbacks to me.
As an aside, I'm not happy with Discord as a platform so I'm working on my own clone with some common identity stuff but with community servers run independently. That is, there are some "federated" identity providers so community servers can agree on identity across servers, then each community server runs its own thing. The trust model is based on the community server - private channels in a community server are not E2E encrypted, you must trust the server. But DMs and DM groups are E2E encrypted and use mutual community servers as relays (with a special class of relay server for people who want to DM but don't have an actual mutual server). I'm having fun with it. Now if only I could figure out why my video has such high latency (even locally!).
Let's be real, LinkedIn is full of LinkedIn Lunatics but pretty much all mainstream social media is pretty shit. They're just different flavors of shit. LinkedIn: bad. Facebook: bad. Twitter: I literally think it contributed to the collapse of discourse and rise of shallow thought / rejection of expertise. I'm not going to list more because the theme is, you guessed it, they're bad.
Google+ had promise in that the many problems of the other platforms could be curtailed with tooling to make your social experience effectively local (not necessarily geographically).
eximius at lcspace.net
be60cfac56374a74e34d7f09f96cf841191a57c365112a49e3e376b309a51144