bitfucker

This is actually one of the best use cases of LLM. Indeed there is culture and nuance that may be lost in translation, but so does every other translation. And most of the time, if we know the literary art being translated ahead of time, we can predict a higher use of more nuanced language and adjust accordingly or skim it by a human.

After all, most "AI" is basically feature embedding in higher dimensions. A different language that refers to the same concept should appear close to each other in those dimensions.

Emulation time it is!

Lol I fucking love that successor of zero

Thanks for the information! Unfortunately, linux users are small in my country. There are rarely any events held here. But this is giving me an idea on how to help people revive their old hardware!

Oh my god this is a great idea. Why is there no more event like this‽

So modern math is proven to be incomplete and we cannot prove that it is consistent either. Those 2 words, incomplete and consistent have a very technical meaning here.

The first is that there is a statement in modern mathematics, which is true, but cannot be proven. And even if we expand it, there will always be such a statement. Hence, incomplete.

And the second, we cannot have a system that proves everything as that system will be inconsistent. Basically if a system can prove everything, then we can easily prove 1=1 AND 1 ≠ 1. If both are proven, then we lose meaning since there is no "truth". But a consistent system cannot prove its self consistency. Ergo, with modern math, we cannot know if math is consistent.

Now, the problem lies in that we use math to model our perceived reality. It means there is a limit to human knowledge, or put simply, there will be something in the universe that we may never know the answer to.

My favorite is the busy beaver function. There exist, at a certain number, that our modern math cannot make any meaningful statement about the function. Here is a great video about it. (youtube link warning). But you can also look at veritasium video for more in depth explanations.

Our current understanding is not enough to state that with confidence. We used to be so confident with classical mechanics and even claims that physics is almost complete. God knows how long our current probabilistic model will last before we find another better model. It may be probabilistic, or it may not.

Gödel Incompleteness Theorem and the boundary of our understanding of the universe.

R

Goodbye

It is worse in HW prototyping where sometimes loose wire is all over the place

Not at all. It is indeed helpful to differentiate between an iterable and literal list. After all, sometimes it will bite you in the ass when you don't differentiate between the two.