aes

joined 1 year ago
[–] aes@programming.dev 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The second part sounds like a thing phones should already be capable of, if it weren't for trying to charge for something. Or snoop on me. Or something worse I just haven't thought of.

Enshittification is such a downer. Oh, well, guillotines will fix it eventually, I guess.

[–] aes@programming.dev 2 points 3 weeks ago

So close! Get one that does poached eggs. It's basically like an ice-cube tray, but the cells are bigger so they fit a whole egg. Only downside is that you need to be quite precise when filling the water. (We use a kitchen scale and measure it to the gram, but it's perfect every time)

The exact model we have is the Cuisinart CEC-10, but I'm sure there are others.

[–] aes@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago

https://open.spotify.com/episode/3umFrR0Bpu1fmXpO1PzDdh?si=NPMlzRCtTZGakiuikO8GEw

This. So much this.

I'm a member of Sveriges Ingenjörer. Fortunately, I've never needed serious union help, but it's probably because the background threat is more than enough. And the salary statistics alone are worth the dues!

[–] aes@programming.dev 2 points 3 months ago

Yesss... You're not wrong, but I really do believe the solution we want is to be found somewhere in that direction. Considering the Google graveyard, the faang crowd isn't all that reliable either.

[–] aes@programming.dev 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

This is a somewhat surprising position to see in the fediverse...

(I mean, I get what you're saying, and I guess someone should bring that to the party, but there is s different way)

[–] aes@programming.dev 2 points 3 months ago

Sounds reasonable, but a lot of recent advances come from being able to let the machine train against itself, or a twin / opponent without human involvement.

As an example of just running the thing itself, consider a neural network given the objective of re-creating its input with a narrow layer in the middle. This forces a narrower description (eg age/sex/race/facing left or right/whatever) of the feature space.

Another is GAN, where you run fake vs spot-the-fake until it gets good.

[–] aes@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago

Well, Rust has a lot of string flavors, and I like utf-8 being the norm, but there are a bunch of cases where enforcing utf-8 is a nuisance, so getting string features without the aggro enforcement is nice.

There's probably some fruity way to make this a security issue, but I care about ascii printables and not caring about anything else. This is a nice trade off: the technical parts are en-US utf-8, the rest is very liberal.

[–] aes@programming.dev 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Rust implementation of the Meta-II meta compiler. I used bstr, which was interesting.

[–] aes@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

Could 'push', yes, as in, "we mentioned it in passing when rock and roll grandpa wasn't paying attention, so he wouldn't throw a hissy fit and withdraw from the service". Oh, you meant to the labels? Ha ha ha, NO. The labels have basically nuclear option veto powers.

As for changes, well, updates get delivered all the time, for various reasons. (The scratched Turbonegro album being one frequent flyer.) I think a lot of those are bullshit SEO-like reasons, but it is what it is.

Which artist appears in most frequent releases? I forget, but I think it's Elvis. Possibly Johnny Cash. Why? Because some material has gone out of copyright in some jurisdictions, and so people have the idea to upload them again in 'new' compilations. (The content team don't even beat these down personally -- that's machine work)

[–] aes@programming.dev 28 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I worked on exactly this for a while, a long, long time ago. It turns out to be an annoyingly difficult bag of problems. The record companies don't really care, they sell (sold, I guess) pieces of plastic. (Idk if they fixed it yet, but the same Turbonegro album kept getting sent with the same scratches, kept getting taken down a while later, for years.) So, good luck trusting them to label anything.

Puritans are so much more aggressive than sane people that making mistakes one way is much more expensive than the other way.

Anyway, we ended up trying to work out which tracks are actually the same song, (Easy for you, harder for friend computer, yes?) and then if one of them is marked explicit, they all are, unless marked "radio edit" or "clean", or whatever. If you think about this for a minute, if one track is labeled "radio edit", maybe the other ones should be marked explicit...

It's a deep rabbit hole, is what I'm saying.

And the people with the pitchforks are never happy.

[–] aes@programming.dev 1 points 8 months ago

Ok, so it's to hear from people building stuff, but isn't it maybe a little light on details? I feel the consultancy contact details to profound insights ratio is a bit underwhelming.

[–] aes@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago

Turn the mouse upside down.

Also, check your BIOS settings. Turning it on from completely off also sounds sus, surely it's 'hibernating' or something, right?

view more: next ›