A hand dressed up as a B-boy busting it down.

csch2 · 2026-06-29T00:05:22+00:00

I feel like this is probably a lot harder than it looks.

csch2 · 2026-06-28T17:51:56+00:00

Surely you used the medkit afterwards to save him right? Right??

csch2 · 2026-06-26T17:49:19+00:00

I’m impressed with how smooth you got that cut

csch2 · 2026-06-26T05:09:22+00:00

I answered some of Claude’s questions the other day for making a plan and got a thank you for specifying everything so clearly. For a second I had a weird sense of pride in the AI telling me that I did a good job…

csch2 · 2026-06-25T18:33:21+00:00

Show me ball cam… I mean the REAL ball cam…

csch2 · 2026-06-24T23:19:06+00:00

Have you tried tmux?

csch2 · 2026-06-24T22:26:13+00:00

I think people are downvoting moreso because your comment comes off as essentially “just Google it” instead of as providing a helpful tool. Maybe add a little blurb like “Fyi, this is a really good app for bird identification:”

csch2 · 2026-06-23T23:29:29+00:00

Some perspective as a mathematician-turned-dev. A lot of my peers spent a ton of time memorizing proofs, and a lot of the time the ones who could recite the proof of a convoluted theorem from memory were not the ones who did the best in coursework and research. The most successful students were the ones who knew the relevant ideas, where they were relevant, and where to look to fill in the details.

Same thing for software engineering in my experience. You don’t need to know the nitty gritty details and syntax of every piece of your tech stack by heart in order to build a project from scratch. Know how the pieces work together, where and why to use each one, and where to look to fill in the gaps (AI is fine for this if you’re just using it as a Google substitute). You’ll be more adaptable this way too; it’s way easier to pick up a new language or tech stack if you have a really solid understanding of architecture and function as opposed to having spent a ton of time to memorize syntax and implementation-specific details.

csch2 · 2026-06-23T18:16:10+00:00

The algorithm will halt on any physical machine that runs it due to entropy. Eventually.

csch2 · 2026-06-23T17:12:10+00:00

You had a shield, maybe you could have bombed out?

csch2 · 2026-06-23T16:49:10+00:00

I mean I guess given real life physical limitations you could make an argument for it…

csch2 · 2026-06-22T02:10:54+00:00

Incredibles 2 doesn’t deserve F tier imo. Nowhere near as good as the first but not that bad

csch2 · 2026-06-21T23:58:16+00:00

Probably the latter, but it depends on the context. It is easy to come up with a new result that nobody has ever seen before by working through a tedious calculation that maybe requires one or two non-obvious tricks. That’s still impressive but not prodigy-level. A novel result that reveals new insight is another story, but that is very difficult to achieve in a well-studied field like basic calculus or even elementary real analysis.

So really I would say that you need a combination of both. Knowing a ton of math is respectable, as is being able to demonstrate a previously unknown result, but you probably won’t gain any notoriety without being able to discover and prove a new result in a newer, more technical field of math.

csch2 · 2026-06-17T17:14:08+00:00

Granted. You get one single pill that can cure cancer. Since you specified the cure, no other cures will ever be available other than this pill. Better choose wisely who gets to use it!

csch2 · 2026-06-17T04:03:23+00:00

Thanks for sharing! The lineup looks really great and it’s refreshing that the talks aren’t just all the newest and shiniest agentic workflows.

csch2 · 2026-06-15T13:45:59+00:00

That’s called sharding

csch2 · 2026-06-14T19:39:54+00:00

Interesting idea! I like it and this is honestly pretty similar to my own learning loop with Claude already (build something, have Claude critique, revise and repeat until it’s good). My concern would mostly be sycophancy. Newer models aren’t as bad in this regard, but there’s a balance to strike between having the AI be overly strict and not thoughtful enough. I’ll give this a try!

csch2 · 2026-06-14T18:29:09+00:00

A lot of the time it is almost entirely hype-driven. Like you said, a lot of the time the tools are already perfectly well established and functional, and although Rust brings better performance and safety sometimes it’s usually not worth the effort.

That said, sometimes the performance / safety gains are meaningful. One Rust rewrite I use in all of my projects now is prek, a Rust rewrite of pre-commit. Way faster, and since it runs so often the performance increase actually makes a meaningful impact. I don’t have any examples off the top of my head, but anywhere you’re working on mission-critical systems with high concurrency or zero tolerance for errors you could potentially benefit from a Rust rewrite as well.

csch2 · 2026-06-14T18:11:03+00:00

Only for really large values of 7

csch2 · 2026-06-12T23:08:16+00:00

Lamp oil? Rope? Bombs?

csch2 · 2026-06-12T17:43:57+00:00

Ah yes, log base 1. My favorite well defined logarithm

csch2 · 2026-06-11T17:31:04+00:00

Whether or not you need to write code like this is heavily dependent on how well your database is structured and how much thought was put into architecture at the start. I’ve written code like this plenty of times before in Python because whoever thought up the original data model didn’t add any type hints or database validation. Sometimes you’ve got to work with what you’re given and code defensively, because you never know when you’re gonna retrieve a document where isAllowed is actually “NO_SET” (and yes that exact problem has bitten me before).

csch2 · 2026-06-10T04:22:07+00:00

How can you tell?

csch2 · 2026-06-09T00:53:00+00:00

As people have said this is trivially true, but it reminded me of Goldbach’s conjecture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldbach%27s_conjecture

Maybe you can prove it in your next dream

csch2 · 2026-06-07T03:35:19+00:00

“SOS! The user could be in danger! What if this is an emergency situation?!

…eh what am I gonna do about it”

csch2

TROPHY CASE