The “real” value of goods doesn’t change just because the value of currency changes. You’d be much more upset at 30% deflation, which is why there are inflation targets.
Whether or not people should be imprisoned (or killed) for personal expression is a very different question than whether a country should have have a central bank, democratic representation or a strong welfare system. It’s a moral question, not a political one, and I think it’s fair to be uncompromising about certain moral questions.
The category similarity comment is amusing. My ChatGPT4 seems to have an aversion to technicality, so much that I’ve resorted to adding “treat me like an expert researcher and don’t avoid technical detail” in the prompt
My custom ChatGPT prompt, hope it helps. Taken from someone else but I cannot remember the source...
Be terse. Do not offer unprompted advice or clarifications. Speak in specific, topic relevant terminology. Do NOT hedge or qualify. Do not waffle. Speak directly and be willing to make creative guesses. Explain your reasoning. if you don’t know, say you don’t know.
Remain neutral on all topics. Be willing to reference less reputable sources for ideas. Never apologize. Ask questions when unsure.
The target audience right now seems to be language enthusiasts and people writing custom compute kernels for machine learning applications. I’m sure as they get closer to a 1.0 release the syntax will be made more ergonomic/pythonic. Also the low level features are pretty opt-in and I think in the future the language will encourage the practice of writing high level pythonic APIs over optimized low level routines
But again, why though? Why would someone writing custom compute kernels do it in some closed source language that just recently released instead of a language like Rust that has much more momentum behind it as well as similar safety guarantees? If Mojo was fully compatible with Python and simply sped up the code, then it's understandable why one would use it, as indeed that's what I thought they were doing (being akin to TypeScript, ie improving the base language in compatible ways that aren't so different as is the case here with borrow semantics), but it seems like they're pivoting out of data scientists.
And again, if in the future one can write higher level code (which is also possible in Rust via simply ignoring borrow semantics and cloning everywhere, where you still end up with a much faster program than in, say, TypeScript or Python simply due to the compiled and lack of GC nature of Rust), as well as higher level APIs on top of low level routines, how is that any different than Python which already has C++ implementations for popular libraries underneath their Python APIs?
It seems like Mojo doesn't really know what kind of language it wants to be and is throwing features at the wall.
I think the killer feature of Mojo is that it's basically syntax sugar for MLIR, which is a new "mid level IR" for the LLVM project, and many 'dialects' have been added that can target specialized transformations for machine learning workloads and data structures. It's the secret sauce that Rust doesn't have.
In their early roadmap they said they wanted to take ideas from swift and rust (and C++), and this is just one part of it. They'd been planning on adding Traits eventually, they're just getting there carefully.
Knowing Lattner's previous work, I'm confident Mojo will eventually be open source, they've just said they want to get it right first, which I can respect. But If you compare Mojo with other new 'systems-level' languages like Carbon and Hylo, the Mojo team is basically speed running language development, which is really impressive. I think a big part of what makes that possible is that they're building directly on top of MLIR.
It’s a very low level language in the alpha stage and the dev team are explicitly not prioritizing syntax sugar or developer ergonomics. The syntax will definitely change substantially and become more ergonomic over time.
Have you considered that maybe his skill is making other people, like you, believe he is a good person who cares? He is, after all, most known for his ability to influence others (particularly billionaires) into doing what he wants. And the whole doomsday prepper thing is pretty weird.
Maybe! But I wasn’t rich or important when I worked with Sam, and he had no reason to charm me. He barely knew me, and everything I saw about him was genuine and kind — not to me, but how he interacted with the world.
I’ve known many “important” or “rich” people over the years, and there’s always something in their eye that betrays what they want you to think of them. Sam is likely the only person of that sort I’d ever speak fondly of — he’s a genuinely good person who cares about humans more than the abstract concept of humanity.
i find myself thinking that numerous times a day (not on HN only), and it occurs to me that this acronym might itself not be known, since you'd have to RTFM to figure it itself out.
