borokov

joined 4 months ago
[–] borokov@lemmy.world 28 points 4 days ago (1 children)

In the early 2ks, computer were ugly grey box with noisy fan and a hard drive that gave the impression a cockroach colony were trying to escape your case. I wanted to build a silent computer to watch Divx movies from my bed, but as a broke teen, I just had access to disposed hardwares I could find there and there.

I dismantled a power supply, stuck mosfets to big mother fucking dissipator, and I had a silent power supply. I put another huge industrial dissipator on CPU (think it was an AMD k6 500Mhz) and had fanless cooling. Remained the hard drive.

Live CD/USB weren't common at that time. I've discovered a live CD distrib (I think it was Knoppix) that could run entirely from RAM.

I removed hard drive, boot on live distrib, then replace CD by my Divx and voila.

Having a fanless-harddriveless computer was pure science fiction for me and my friends at that time.

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I don't want to troll, this is a serious comment and I just want to highlight different perspective to improve mutual understanding.

Definition of words depend on the context. They are model to express ideas and have a common understanding of things. A bit like Newtonian model explain why planete orbit around the sun (Until mercury drift comes into play).

If we were on the context of neurological conference or medical comitte, I would completly agree with you. But we are on Internet, on Lemmy, and on a post that don't even aimed to talk about mental disorder. Stating this, when talking about illness in this context, one refer to high level definition of illness that you'll first find in the dictionary. According to Oxford dictionary: "a condition in which the body or mind is harmed because an organ or part is unable to work as it usually does; a disease or sickness"

I hope you would agree that, taking only this definition, Autism, at least more extrem cases, respect this definiton.

Adding precision can be usefull, but you're then changing context. Let's take an analogy.

My daugther asked me yesterday why the sun rise on a side and fall on the other side of the horizon. I told here it's because sun rotate around the earth. This explanation is enough to answer the question, and is in the context of talking to a 5 year old girl. There is no need to explain that earth actually rotate on itself and around the sun, and that rotate around galaxy. There is no need to detail about Newtonian mecanic, nor general relativity in this context. This would just add noise to the discussion. The geocentric model is true in this context.

Another analogy. I'm talking about multiplication, and affirm that ab = ba. In this context, without precision, everyone agree with this. But, strickly speaking, multiplication being a binary operation acting inside a group, it's not always commutative. Typically, matrix multiplication is not commutative. So, ab = ba in the context of algebric structure is false.

As a matematician, there would be no reasons to feel ofended or to claim that ab=ba is false when commenting post talking about, let say, carpentry. You can precise that, when digging into the details, there are cases when ab != ba, to open another discussion, but claiming that ab != ba, in the context of carpentry, is just... wrong.

Worst than that, it generate conflicts. You claim that someone is wrong without arguing, or explaining your own context. Going to the extreme, I'm quite conviced this kind of behavior fuel intolerance, up to the point of having a a retarded redhead elected (I think this will become the new godwin point). Most of people have nothing against Autism, LGBTQRST+, or whatever minorities. But being constantly corrected that "there is no 2 gender", "autism is not a decease", "the terms master or blacklist are ofending because it refer to slavery", etc... just becomes unbearable and makes people fall into intolerance. Not because they have something against the minory itself, but because they feel attacked.

My 2 cents.

[–] borokov@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think I've spot the autistic guy.

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Depend on the level. It's a spectrum, but at some point it do become a illness.

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

That at the begining, I thought the principle was to make computer smarter and smarter so that they can reach the level of human brain. But it's seems they just try to make people dumber and dumber to reach level of current AI.

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 41 points 1 week ago (1 children)

How about no ?

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

That's just stupid declaration to please far right electorate. As a government, you cannot just do nothing when this happen. But, honestly, what can you really do in this specific case ? So you do some stupid declaration to please old and grumpy people, and in a few weeks, nobody will think about it.

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Dunning-Kruger effect.

Lots of people now think they can be developpers because they did a shitty half working game using vibe coding.

Would you trust a surgeon that rely on ChatGPT ? So why sould you trust LLM to develop programs ? You know that airplane, nuclear power plants, and a LOT of critical infrastructure rely on programs, right ?

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

neovim, because it's much nicer and user friendly than vim.

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 23 points 3 weeks ago

Why the fuck would I drive a watch ?

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

Prompting.

Remember the day where you have to type commands on a terminal to do anything and some guy came up with "button" and "windows" and suddenly you could print yo document with a single click ?

Oh, cool, let's bring back the trend of speaking to your computer through a text area !

Fuck LLM.

[–] borokov@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago

The point of self hosting is not to engage people going in your server. The point of self hosting is to have control over your infrastructure. It's like renting or buying a home.

When you buy a home, you don't complain that no one wants to sleep in your home 😆

 

I think you know the simulation hypothesis. Our universe could be a simulation created by... well, let's call them "gods".

But, if the simulation continue, we, humans, may reach the point where we could create a simulation of our own universe. In which, the simulated people would reach the point where they simulate their universe, etc...

So, as a corollary, it is not possible to simulate the entire universe, because this imply simulating an infinity of entire universe. It is only possible to simulate a simpler, smaller universe at each "layer".

So my question, are we at the top of the stack, or at the bottom ? Which would imply a much bigger and much more complexe universe above us.

view more: next ›