Clojure doesn't have much manpower, being a niche language and all, so maybe that's where your impression comes from. It's hardly on purpose, and there's many examples of software that ships with another language as public API.
Rama is written in clojure but the main api is java
Klipse is written in cljs but is marketed as a "javascript library"
Rama[1] for example launched with Java API first. Probably for some reason Datomic just didn't get traction with JS users for some nontechnical reason.
I think it makes much more sense to make this statement for the rational numbers: It's the smallest field inside the real numbers that contains the naturals.
So every subset that allows you to do your daily calculations contains the rationals.
They’re a field by construction, and yes, the initial field of characteristic zero, but otherwise don’t arise in any natural way. They’ll be there if you’re studying fields, but exact division by arbitrary integers doesn’t seem to be a very natural property outside the reals. Again, imagine doing any practical computations with rationals and see how far you get before resorting to decimal approximation.
I think teachers lie to children and say that decimals are just another way of representing rationals, rather than the approximation of real numbers that they are (and introduce somewhat silly things like repeating decimals to do it), which makes rationals feel central and natural. That’s certainly how it was for me until I started wondering why no programming languages come with rational number packages.
Few more years and they would've finished Polarbanen. The northern Norway railroad connecting Trondheim to Tromsø, far inside the Arctic Circle.
Giving us $50 trains to Tromsø instead of $500 planes.
But my enthusiasm diminished after learning that they worked thousands people to death.
> Giving us $50 trains to Tromsø instead of $500 planes.
It's only $50 if the government pays for the rest of the ticket. $50 per passenger won't even cover track maintenance. Source: My ass, but I still think I'm right.
You tell me, I'm from Poland. Talked to many older people, who remember the war. One thing that caught my attention, because it surfaced with every single old person I asked about the war:
Germans/Nazis were horrible, but Russians/Soviets were an order of magnitude worse.
Funny thing that now many people don't even know that it was Russia and Germany BOTH that started the war. And they were supposed to attack Poland simultaneously, but Stalin, PR animal that he was, delayed Red Army's attack by one week, thereby creating the legend that it wasn't Russia that started the war.
Funny sidenote: The mobile client for "Magic: the Gathering - Arena" does not even support "roaming" for your phones connection: If you for example turn off wifi during a match, it looses (and can not reestablish) the full connection even though your phone easily switches to mobile data.
Interesting that it can’t reestablish the connection, as the application level protocol should support it just fine. The client should notice the GRE (game rules engine) TCP socket is broken, and reset everything. When you reconnect, the front door service should notify you to a GRE session still in progress, and the client should be able to rejoin that. At least, that’s how it works on desktop.
My guess is that they get the parameters for the current connection from the phone context and then use a nonstandard library to establish the connection for maybe performance reasons. But then I think they did not bother to implement a mechanism for reconnecting.
Maybe! I’ve found that people usually don’t do extra work if they don’t need to. The heavy notation in differential geometry, for example, can be awfully helpful when you’re actually trying to do Lagrangian mechanics on a Riemannian manifold. And superfluous bits of a definition might be kept around because going from the minimal definition to the one that is actually useful in practice can sometimes be non-trivial, so you’ll just keep the “superfluous” definition in your head.
To add to this, I'd even argue that the most "scary looking" parts of the GAN paper are where Goodfellow is just showing intermediate steps, like in (4) and (5). I guess one can argue that this is superfluous but that feels pretentious. I'd argue that the math here is helping communicate.
I think people forget why math is used. I'm always a little surprised that programmers don't see this because the languages are being used for the same reasons. Precision. They're terrible languages to communicate something like this conversation but then again English is a terrible way to communicate highly abstract concepts.
On the other hand, I've definitely seen people use math to make their works seem more important (definitely in some ML) I think I more frequently see it just being copy pasted (like every diffusion paper ever). I think that is probably superfluous, though it's definitely debatable and I'm absolutely certain these use cases aren't for flexing lol.
I thought the same thing. Some of the commenters said this move might be related to stock price or appeasing shareholders, so I wonder if that, too, was directed at them, as in “we’re big and we plan on getting even bigger”
There's a fun experiment with toddlers where they re-enter a room but the car they just sat in was replaced by a tiny version: They will try to get into the car even though only their foot fits in.
So size/scale is not as easy a concept to model in our minds as we might assume.
I remember from the early days of midjourney (and SD,etc) that there was a point in time where midjourney had created more images than the whole of humanity had created in its entire existence up to that point (or something along the lines) ...
But volume is just not the same as impact.
I guess the share of code that gets actually used and was written by AI is still tiny.
The CEO of Braintrust, a company that offers AI interviewers, is quoted as saying “The truth is, if you want a job, you’re gonna go through this thing,”. Let's see how they react to the founding of 'Trainbust', a company offering AI interviewees to respond to AI interviewers. The truth is, if they want to use AI interviewers, they’re gonna have to go through this thing.
> It should be noted that not all AI interviewers are created equal—there’s a wide range of AI interviewers entering the market.
Maybe someone will make an AI to interview the AI interviewers and see which one is the best? AI's interviewing human candidates gonna have to go through this thing.
the real punchline is how jobs hiring with AI are hiring for positions which require the worker to pretend to be some kind of bot (follow a script, repeating the same actions cyclically)
I mean... If many agents would truly effectively understand each candidate and each role to much more effectively match people to appropriate, desirable roles, that could be awesome. Not holding out but possible.
Why is there no JS client for datomic (that is not abandoned)?
reply