@jonny there is also the falacy that an automated system will somehow bind people to behave according to its builtin assumptions and they will not game it in every which way. Only people can put themselves in other people's shoes and imagine why and how they might game a system. DAO is either stupid or evil.
“Each new observing run brings new discoveries and surprises. The third observing run saw gravitational wave detection becoming an everyday thing, but I still think each detection is exciting!" - Hannah Middleton
@gerrymcgovern nevertheless I think its important to push current ideas regarding how to tackle climate change as far as possible as soon as possible.
Provided we stick to and demand measurable change (and thus eliminate greenwashing) this process is seeding the knowledge and behavioral toolkit that will enable the monumental further transformations that need to happen.
A sustainable energy system is a necessary but not sufficient condition for reaching full #sustainability
@joshjacobsen people opted for economic "efficiency" defined in some arbitrary way and religiously optimised for it in a spreadsheet. Scale up some accounting metric or move out of the way.
To paraphrase a well known #sustainability cartoon, "we destroyed any sense of locality, tradition, community and social contract, but for a brief moment in time we reached a glorious GDP number".
Ultimately its just stupidity and narrow greed. Optimizing multi-dimensional objectives is harder.
It would be cool if the mathematical group structure of conceptual models of scales reflects some physical crystal-like symmetry of these chains of neurons.
@johncarlosbaez@skarthik do these constraints reflect some generic feature of our neural network topology? While their precise nature varies from culture to culture, there are always *some*.
@leroy single thread but with the possibility to optionally split into a new one. Tangential tangents hidden inside a busy discussion are cognitive load without an obvious benefit
@danjac yes, the vast prior art of older languages is both a curse and a blessing.
discussing the real advantages of new takes is subtle enough, but weighing these against the benefit of reusing existing know-how for both current and future projects is very tricky. in applied maths this is the problem of subtracting two large numbers (catastrophic cancellation): your result is unstable, very sensitive to assumptions
@OddDev ha ha, fair enough, but thats as anecdotal as my hunch
I don't mean that none of the new proposals will make it into say "top 5" universal language, its just that there is a pattern that it may take longer (if ever) than what the sentiment was few years ago
In the rust vs cpp space the latter is definitely trying to get its act together, whether people will again build greenfield projects remains to be seen
@MobileOak but as far as I know kotlin has not made any meaningful dent outside the android domain (the vast corporate space that determines the future of java). So its fate is highly linked to the whims of Google and even they hedge their bets with dart/flutter
@tamas oh for sure. its only a gut feeling anyway. but the pattern I sort for see is that 3-4 years ago the newcomers had an easier time because the incumbents were more stagnant. For example the complain that python is not fast enough prompted several iterations and more are coming.