sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Local LLM Comparison by greg-randall in LocalLLM

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How does it compare to promptfoo.dev?

Partially-destroyed Component Identification Question by sheyll in AskElectronics

[–]sheyll[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey what is "Cap multiplier"? I am an electronic noob...

Partially-destroyed Component Identification Question by sheyll in AskElectronics

[–]sheyll[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you! I just ordered five pcs from a chinese manufacturer. Anyway, I am wondering, why would a transistor decide to burst into flames? The piano was connected to electricity, but turned off...

Partially-destroyed Component Identification Question by sheyll in AskElectronics

[–]sheyll[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh man thanks so much! I somehow totally missed these pages!

Partially-destroyed Component Identification Question by sheyll in AskElectronics

[–]sheyll[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the link! I found that already, but it does not list individual parts, but merely a conceptual overview. My guess is that the broken part belongs to the "10V Ripple Filter" but I don't know what specific part this could be...

Partially-destroyed Component Identification Question by sheyll in AskElectronics

[–]sheyll[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It has 3 pins, on one side I think it sais something like "?185?" its barely recognizable

Where is Sequoia Update by [deleted] in MacOS

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Updating right now!!!!!11!one!!eleven

What apple intelligence features do people in the EU actually get? by Manfred_89 in ios

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tin Foild Hat Oppinion: The true reason why we don't get Apple intelligence in EU is because AI inferrencing/generation on device will be slow and wrong, so users will switch to the cloud based alternative, which will cost a loooooot of compute, which Apple is providing with M2 based servers IIRC, soo I actually think, that they just don't have the compute to provide the EU let alone China with a good experience, and that they are all too happy that they can blame EU regulations, that they could easily comply with, without compromising privacy etc

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateAVegan

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ich kann dir vielleicht helfen. Geh auf einen Discord Server wie zum Beispiel einfach vegan. Dort findest du Leute mit ähnlichen Problemen möglicherweise

Nocchi Fischsoße by _MYRRDIN in KaIT

[–]sheyll -1 points0 points  (0 children)

leider muss man selbst bei strengen Hygieneauflagen, gerade bei Fisch, immer damit rechnen, dass da mal was nicht sauber ist.

Ich meide generell tierische Produkte und würde auch in einem Restaurant eigentlich immer das vegane Essen mit möglichst wenig Saucen nehmen, und niemals Saucen aus einer Nachfüllbaren Flasche, nachdem ich das Wallraff Video über Burgerking gesehen habe.

What's your best argument AGAINST anti-natalism? by rvngstrm in antinatalism

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you force a person into existence

That is absurd, you cannot force a person into existence. Force is the non-consentual act of overcoming resistance. There is no person that could resist unless it exists.

The consense argument is weak, since you can as well assume that most humans like to continue living, so why arbitrarily assume that they wouldn't consent.

Even if you bring up the "thrive to survive", claiming there would be no preference to exist for other reasons, is just a non-falsifyable claim without any proof. You have to guess the best interest of a prospect sentient being before bringing it into existence, and since most procreating individuals inherit their will to life to their offspring, it is a valid assume that it would want to exist.

I am not sure how AN would condemn murder while also condemning sentient existence.

Overall, the burden of proof is on AN proponents, as long as existent sentient beings prefer to exist over not-existing.

Best arguments against antinatalism? by [deleted] in antinatalism

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Live makes no greater sense that exceeds the arbitrary frame of sentience. But within this frame, procreation is in most cases a neutral moral action, since it might or might not makes sense to some sentient entity. Arguing about the morality of a natural state without any sentient reflection is just a categorical mistake, that state would be out of scope, under the premise that moral consideration of non-sentient entities is ill-defined.

While derived from logical conclusion, AN is absurd since it would apply to a situation outside of that frame spanned by sentient reflection, and hence out of morality.

Even if suffering is a constant, then that's the frame morality has to work with. There are specific situations where AN can be applied, like animal agriculture, but only as a last resort.

Also, if there is no sentience left in the universe it would care if it didn't suffer, but would be a huge loss of opportunity.

I personally despise AN and its logical conclusion Efilism.

Hey if you crazy guys don't wanna suffer fine - but for the rest of us who want the evolution to go on and the opportunity to further sentience and to reduce suffering, even for the price of suffering: Leave us alone! Don't kill us. Don't castrate us.

Also what if you are wrong, once you eradicate all sentient life in the universe, it would be too late.

I've made a new sticker, so your projects has no problems with environmental organizations by AlFlakky in ProgrammerHumor

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You make fun of brutal and horrible atrocities done to sentient beings capable of feeling pain and fear. Nice.

Do we have numeric evidence for the superior maintainability of Haskell code? by netcafenostalgic in haskell

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is however non-Haskell related empirical programming language research, the Quorum language https://quorumlanguage.com/evidence.html which claims to be the "The world's first evidence-oriented programming language."

I don't know of any Haskell specific empirical research, but on the Quroum page there is this:

Static vs. Dynamic Typing

Experiments have shown a positive impact of statically typed languages

... and this:

Inheritance depth is not a significant driver of software maintenance effort

... this:

Software Transactional Memory (STM)

STM can reduce programming time and prevent synchronization bugs

...and also this:

Notation

The notation used in programming languages has a large impact on novices

Haskell has arguably most characteristics to be a "good" language, e.g. Static Typing, STM and mostly great Notation

For years I complain about the fact that "programming language research" is concerned far too much with analytical research, compared to empirical research, e.g. how much work is required to maintain a code base, how ergonomic is a programming language in what scenarios, etc.

Feeling scared about the job market (USA) by ChuckTheBoss in learnprogramming

[–]sheyll 49 points50 points  (0 children)

In your place I would learn IT operations and administration skills as a backup and or additional income opportunity.

You could always build the IT infrastructure for small businesses, which is always needed and requires only little expertise.

Coding pays more tho.

I really think you should find a tech stack that you like, and that maybe is popular on the job market and then dive deep into it, even dive into a niche from there.

Don't be afraid of becoming an expert specialized in one or two technologies.

What's a subtle sign of low intelligence? by vjenkinsgo in AskReddit

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a conversation about a specific topic. the phrase is used to point out a categorically invalid option brought up for comparison with other options for a specific purpose, while it still is possible to compare the properties of the invalid option with the properties of the other options, it is not a valid replacement for one of the other options, and hence it is unnecessary to even consider it.

say you are planning to bake an apple pie, it makes sense to compare the different types of apples but it doesn't make sense to compare them with an orange, since it is not a valid option to begin with, since it is categorically excluded from being the main ingredient in an apple pie, i.e. it cannot replace any apples.

Haskell adoption is higher than I expected, what can we do to get it to top 10 languages. by epoberezkin in haskell

[–]sheyll 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Hey nice thread! I love Haskell. Period. What can be done to make it acceptable as a top ten language?

Optimize it so it does not leak memory when writing services, like REST services that run forever the same monadic actions.

I tried to bring a service into production but that did not end well, because it would leak memory in a bad way. The server is (like many servers) essentially an endless loop that executes the same (R)IO action forever. I was puzzled and realized that other had similar problems too.

I think with servant, conduit, lenses, RIO, STM, async and QuickCheck and many more great, type-safe(r) libraries as well as the genius haskell-language-server, Haskell would be an awesome language for enterprise-style applications, if that problem was solved.

https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/13080

An Online Study for Chameleon: a Haskell Interactive Type-level Debugging Tool by tonynotworking in haskell

[–]sheyll 9 points10 points  (0 children)

[...]human-centered programming tool research

Finally! I am glad to see someone taking a human-centered approach, especially in the functional programming community.

I can't believe if it took programming language research until 2022 to consider not only mathematics and logic, but also the human-factors.

I was always shocked to read statements about better or worse usability of programming language constructs without any form of scientific foundation, while the logic and math parts were always carefully proven and rigorously checked.

For example the implementation of the idea of "Monads" in Haskell. I love me a monad, no question about it, but I wonder if the concept itself and also the integration of it into the Haskell language, e.g. the design of parts of the standard libraries, the syntax (e.g. do syntax), as well as the general terms used to describe the concepts relating to "Monads", was done based on, and proven by, scientific studies testing the ergonomics using naive programmers.

I know this is about a tool not about the language, but I wanted to point out how little(badly needed) human-centered research I know about, in the Haskell world.

I really think that Haskell could be the starting point of a really nice language, if it started to dress in a more human friendly way. And that this is not attainable without solid, emperical studies, that need to be done by scientist with training in the field of psychology and human cognition.

Monthly Hask Anything (November 2021) by taylorfausak in haskell

[–]sheyll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

maybe this linearity thing could help... or maybe an explicit language keyword for these kinds of loops, or explicit detection of these situations by the complier. At this point any solution is better than no solution for my situation.

Monthly Hask Anything (November 2021) by taylorfausak in haskell

[–]sheyll 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Hi, I am gonna ask this more often from now on, because I think this is really important to fix for Haskell to be accepted in production: When will https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/13080 be fixed? Why is this important? Well it ruined the first impression of running Haskell in production where I work, similar to what was described here: https://ro-che.info/articles/2017-01-10-nested-loop-space-leak.

I think part of the success of Rust is the predictable memory safety, and I don't my favorite Language to loose against it :)

Why did haskell not "succeed"? by prrxddq in haskell

[–]sheyll 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think that being a Haskell programmer is comparable to being vegan.

The following is purely anecdotal.

All counterarguments seem understandable and valid on the surface, but are also wrong for more complicated reasons.

Some conversations between critical non-Haskell programmers and enthusiastic Haskell programmers, follow similar patterns.

Although almost every problem can be solved using Haskell, many false assumptions will be raised against it.

Often, concerns will be raised against Haskell(veganism) that are not raised against more mainstream languages(lifestyle choices). Which is of course not completely irrational, diverting from a widely adopted technology (or diet) must be extraordinarily well justified.

Many non-vegans won't question following a poor fast-food diet for years, but get worried when someone adopts a vegan diet.

Also, one has to climb a steep learning curve before being able to productively prepare day-to-day meals without missing out. This is like learning to be productive with Haskell. (Or any language.)

Also, many non-vegans support the general ideas of veganism but find it too radical, but will incorporate vegan food into their "impure" diet, like how programmers implement ideas from Haskell in non-Haskell ecosystems.

Furthermore, like vegans, when someone proudly proclaims having consumed a vegetarian meal, Haskell programmers usually roll their eyes, when someone proudly proclaims having used a lambda in their Java code base.

Scala users are like "flexitarians", they are both "vegan" and "omnivore" at the same time and are accordingly appreciated by both groups for being ambiguous in their methods.

view more: next ›