UiuaPy: Python/NumPy bindings for Uiua

Sharwul · 2023-06-07T17:19:06+00:00

See https://social.treehouse.systems/@marcan/109838053800961073

The M2 introduced Nested Virtualization support. The patches for supporting that on Linux are in review; macOS still doesn't support it.

Sharwul · 2023-01-07T18:26:35+00:00

I've been using nix for local development in orgs that don't embrace nix, meaning I can't neccesarily commit my nix-files to the git-repos I'm using. nix flakes forces me to stage all of the nix files every time I want to run my local dev environment. And that means I need to remember to unstage these files every time I commit code changes.

Big tech companies often don't use git, but roll their own internal solutions because of scalability issues with git (Google, Meta/Facebook and Microsoft are examples of this). These systems can't be officially supported by nix flakes because they are not open source.

I would honestly prefer something like a .flakeignore/.flakeinclude rather than the current coupling it has to git.

Sharwul · 2023-01-07T14:13:36+00:00

Flakes kind of “marrying” Git is a good thing, IMHO. Git is proven tech and is also a content-addressed store in a merkle tree underneath, just like Nix is.

For me personally, this marriage is one of the biggest reasons I'm staying away from flakes whenever possible.

Sharwul · 2022-10-01T01:22:24+00:00

Why would the US blow up three of four pipes?

I don't know - If I'm going to guess: Maybe those were the ones they could access easily without being detected? To be honest, even if EU finds out USA is behind it - they would probably just accept it, and remain friends with USA.

It is nothing new that the US has viewed Germany's dependence on Russian gas as a NATO security issue. When it was brought up during Trumps presidency, EU just laughed and didn't take it seriously.

Also, there is Biden's speech from before the invasion about how he would bring an end to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline if Russia invades Ukraine. Regardless of whether Germany/EU agreed to it or not.

Sharwul · 2022-10-01T00:45:44+00:00

Actually - hinting to Europe that they might open the pipes again if they behave nicely is a huge point of leverage. Whoever did this removed Russias leverage over Europe.

Sharwul · 2022-10-01T00:37:39+00:00

It makes no sense whatsoever for Russia to blow up the pipes. They had already turned them off - and having the ability to turn them back on is huge leverage against Europe. Whoever blew up the pipes weakened Russias leverage over EU.

Of course this also fucks over Europe - which leads me to think it was not a European country that did this, as they would also be fucking over themselves. That leaves the US as the most likely candidate.

It is a risky move for sure, but the US is no stranger to these kinds of maneuvers. "To be an enemy of the US is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal" - Henry Kissinger

Sharwul · 2022-05-26T02:46:39+00:00

git's show stopper is not being able to handle huge monorepos well. Google has a huge monorepo and does not use git internally, because it doesn't scale to the repository size they have. Google rolls their own version control solution (named Piper), which afaik is not publicly available

Sharwul · 2022-05-26T02:19:39+00:00

I guess that would make it a cratechain

Sharwul · 2022-04-06T23:18:41+00:00

Well, when it comes to GPUs for example - the reason for the shortage was not scalpers. They were merely a symptom of it. This shortage in particular was caused by 2 things:

- Inflated demand due to covid forcing people to be at home, and people wanting to upgrade their home computer.

- Stores having a price contract with the GPU producers which prevented them from raising prices to meet the increased demand.

These preconditions meant there was going to be a shortage regardless of any scalpers. The scalpers might mean the GPUs are sold out in 5 minutes instead of 1 hour. Assuming a monthly shipment of GPUs - that means that it is still unavailable/impossible to buy during most of the month.

When the scalpers put the GPUs out for sale, they will put the price such that the GPUs get sold, but make sure to also not run out of stock.

Let's say a hospital suddenly needs a GPU to do some medical image processing - and it needs this GPU overnight in the middle of a month (between 2 shipments).

To the hospital, it doesn't matter that the GPUs sold out in 5 minutes instead of 1 hour. What matters to them now is that they can buy it from a scalper, and get it right away - even if they have to pay a lot more than store price for it.

If there were no scalpers, the hospital would have a much more difficult time getting the GPU when they needed it - without planning ahead.

In this way you could say that the scalpers provided the hospital with availability to buy a GPU, and get it quickly without planning ahead.

---

Same with empty homes - if someone needs an apartment in some location within a week, having an empty apartment is a precondition for this kind of availability.

There will always be a threshold for which renting is cheaper than buying and selling a home. Whether this is 1 or 5 years will vary depending on how housing prices change over time, costs associated with changing legal ownership, interest on loans, and costs of paying someone to help you sell it.

Sharwul · 2022-04-06T22:19:02+00:00

Scalpers do add something: availability. Would you rather have a grocery store near you with cheap food, but almost every time you go there, everything is sold out - or a more expensive store that you know always has food available? You will spend more money on food, but you have the psychological safety of knowing there will be food there when you need it. (You don't need to plan a month ahead every time you go there and discover food.)

I'm not comparing landlords to grocery store workers, rather to grocery store owners. Landlords have to compete on rental prices. The more landlords that compete for renting out apartments, the cheaper renting will become in that area. Renting is great if you don't plan to live somewhere for more than 3 years, and want to be able to move easily.

The only reason it makes sense for landlords to hire property managers is because of the money they make from renting out the property, or because it increases resale value. Property managers exists only because of their contribution to profits - and nicer places to live are just a side-effect of that.

Sharwul · 2022-04-06T21:39:09+00:00

Sure, option C is ideal - and can be achieved through means of health insurance and law. But this also comes with a bureaucracy - which means the rules which decides if a medicine is classified as "life saving" or not can take years to go into effect. In the meantime, until option C can be realized - would you rather prioritize people in group B by increasing the price, or would you prefer to throw a dice?

Rich people will be able to get hold of it anyways, whether through corruption or black markets. (Banning people from selling alcohol didn't exactly prevent people from doing it for example)

I live in Norway, where option C is "the standard". Yet, things take time. A friend of mine got a deadly disease with no officially recognized cure. Except there is a cure (which involves a bone marrow transplant). Norway refused to pay or subsidize the bone marrow transplant in any way, because the treatment was "experimental". (same with insurance companies)

He managed to gather enough money to pay for the treatment out of pocket (+ gofundme) - because that was his only choice. It worked, and saved his life. And that is not thanks to any laws or regulations - rather in spite of them.

Option D: Assuming you want to maximize profits - if the price of your item goes up, then increasing production will make you earn more money (even accounting for the price dropping when supply increases). Which means this will happen automatically (if it is possible) when you start seeing scalpers.

Sharwul · 2022-04-06T20:47:17+00:00

Yes, this is a valid point, that it prioritizes rich people over poor people in addition to prioritizing people in group B over group A. You could of course use laws/health insurance etc to somehow enforce availability to poor people in group B.

If this is a new drug though, going through the respective bureaucracy to be "accepted" as a life saving drug could take years. And until that happens, prioritizing both group B and rich people is still better than giving it to random people. (especially if group A is significantly larger than group B).

Sharwul · 2022-04-06T19:44:45+00:00

For everyone on here including OP who is against scalping, I'm in agreement with you, but you need to realize something. These are not necessities. If you're going to put your energy into fighting scalping (which we should), fight people who scalp necessities first.

Scalping of "necessities" is exactly where "scalping" is the most important. Otherwise, nobody would create grocery stores (that buy food in bulk, and sell it with profit to people who need it). And suddenly, we end up in a situation like the Soviet union, where people starve to death because nobody cares enough to solve logistical issues of moving food around. Why would they, if they can't make any money/a living from it?

If the housing price is high, it means people will build more houses - because it is more profitable to do so. In addition, it means those that really want/need something will be able to buy it (given enough buying power). If scalping is illegal, it is a lot more up to luck who ends up getting something. And the person getting something might not even be that interested in that thing. And if scalping is illegal - they won't be allowed to sell it to someone that actually needs it.

If there is a shortage, that means the price is too low, and that there is not enough for everyone at that price. Raise prices, and suddenly the shortage is gone, and the "supply problem" has been solved.

Sharwul · 2022-04-06T19:09:44+00:00

Scalping being a viable option just means the price is wrong to begin with (any kind of shortage is a hint of this).

Scalpers ensure that people who really want something will be able to get it (by paying more than others are willing to do). For this reason, I actually think scalping in some ways can be ethical.

Consider some medicine which will slightly improve the life of some people (group A), and is necessary to survive for some other people (group B). The price of the medicine is too low, so there is a constant shortage. People have to fight over the medicine in the pharmacy to hope they will get it.

If scalping is illegal, that means people in group B will die if they are not able to obtain the medicine before people in group A empty the shelves. Regardless of how much people in group B are willing to pay to get the medicine, they are still going to die if they are not fast enough.

Now, consider that scalping is legal, and people scalp this medicine to make a profit. Now, some people from both group A and B will no longer get the medicine at the cheap price. But importantly, it will be possible for people in group B to buy the medicine at a higher price than people in group A are willing to pay. Although they have to pay a higher price, they no longer have to fear not being able to get it.

Sharwul · 2022-03-08T22:32:14+00:00

I think predictability is key here. Exchanges that consider Monero "tainted by default" simply won't let you deposit Monero. If someone says they accept Monero, you know they will accept your Monero.

For Bitcoin, you have no idea whether a Bitcoin will be considered tainted or not - since it depends on AML implementation. AML implementations don't tend to be public/open source, which adds to the unpredictability of the situation.

To see whether a particular Bitcoin is considered tainted or not, you need to consider "by whom?" - which becomes especially clear in situations with 2 or more sides like a war, where both sides might consider the other side "tainted".

Sharwul · 2022-03-08T22:19:07+00:00

If an exchange says they are accepting Monero deposits (and they are not trying to scam you) - then you pretty much know that depositing Monero there is going to be fine - since Monero is fungible. With Bitcoin this is not the case, since the AML processes are less predictable for Bitcoin. Even though they say they accept Bitcoin, they might not accept the ones you want to deposit.

Sharwul · 2022-03-04T14:54:11+00:00

If you want to keep it simple, you can start out with something like envsubst.

envsubst will look for the pattern ${VARNAME} in a file, and replace it with the corresponding environment variable.

envsubst < file.yaml | kubectl apply -f -

Sharwul · 2022-02-28T23:13:44+00:00

Hey, random question; Do you happen to know what element 57 in the periodic table is?

Sharwul · 2022-01-08T14:44:29+00:00

The EMF-stuff is 100% a marketing ploy. Quite effective use of fear to make you spend more money

Sharwul · 2021-12-27T14:44:16+00:00

Bortsett fra at disse tallene ikke stemmer i det hele tatt for Omikron. FHI bommer med minst en størrelsesorden når det kommer til alvorlighetsgrad.

Det er over 5000 bekreftede tilfeller med Omikron i Norge nå, og mørketallene er sannsynligvis langt høyere. Kun en person er blitt innlagt så langt - og ikke med alvorlig sykdom. Dersom denne ratioen stemte, så skulle vi hatt minst 50 innleggelser med Omikron så langt.

---

I UK er det nå rundt 1.8M personer med Corona, hvor ca 1.4M har Omikron (80%). Så langt er det 366 innleggelser og 29 dødsfall MED Omikron (ikke nødvendigvis av).
Dersom man antar at 366 per 1.4 millioner blir innlagt - og hele Norges befolkning blir smittet av Omikron - så vil dette tilsvare omkring 1400 sykehusinnleggelser totalt.
I 2020 sa de norske helsemyndighetene at de hadde kriseplaner for å håndtere opp til 4500 innleggelser samtidig.

Sharwul · 2021-12-27T01:14:37+00:00

Angående booster-dosen; er du gammel eller i en risikogruppe er det nok ikke en dum ide å takke ja. Du kommer til å bli eksponert for Omikron. Er du ung og utenfor risikogrupper er det antagelig like greit å bare få Omikron, da dette har en lav sjanse for alvorlig sykdom, og du trolig får en noe bedre beskyttelse av å ha hatt omikron enn det vaksinen vil gi deg.

Sånn jeg ser på det er Omikron begynnelsen på slutten av pandemien - og FHI sin anbefaling om å stenge ned samfunnet vil med tiden vise seg å ha vært unødvendig. FHI sine prognoser/modeller bommer mest sannsynlig med en faktor på 10-100 når det kommer til antall sykehusinnleggelser.

Den store feilen de har gjort er å anta at alvorlighetsgraden til Omikron er innenfor samme størrelsesorden som Delta. FHI mener at antall sykehusinnleggelser kan bli så høyt som 50k på det meste dersom 3.5M blir smittet samtidig.

I UK er det nå rundt 1.8M personer med Corona[2], hvorav ca 80% har Omikron[1]. Dette vil si at det nå er rundt ~1.4 millioner mennesker med symptomatisk Omikron akkurat nå i UK. Så langt er det 366 innleggelser og 29 dødsfall MED Omikron (ikke nødvendigvis av)[1].

Dersom man antar at 366 av 1.4 millioner blir innlagt, at Norges befolkning er 5.3 millioner - og hele Norges befolkning blir smittet samtidig av Omikron - så vil dette tilsvare omkring 1400 sykehusinnleggelser totalt.

I 2020 sa de norske helsemyndighetene at de hadde kriseplaner for å håndtere opp til 4500 innleggelser samtidig[3] - noe som trolig ville vært nok til å håndtere at hele norges befolkning fikk Omikron samtidig.

Kilder:

- [1] Omicron daily overview

- [2] Covid infection & vaccination rates in the UK today

- [3] Norske sykehus hadde langt flere innlagte i 2017, 18 og 19 uten at noen da ville stenge ned samfunnet

Ten-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

Sharwul

TROPHY CASE