disconcision

6 ms·

1.
by disconcision 1mo ago
i maintain a codebase that uses Bonzai ( https://github.com/hazelgrove/hazel/ ); agent based development works just fine, though probably a bit more token churn
2.
by disconcision 5mo ago
not exactly the same, but worth noting that in a spectacular display of being too early, microsoft shipped this 30 years ago (active desktop in 1997 merged the windows explorer with internet explorer, turning folders into web pages).
3.
by disconcision 6mo ago
i assert that by your evidentiary standards humans don't reason. presumably one of us is wrong. therefore, humans don't reason.
4.
by disconcision 6mo ago
all three are isomorphic. but in some languages if you define a function via something like `function myFun(x: Int, y: Bool) = ...` and also have some value `let a: (Int, Bool) = (1, true)` it doesn't mean you can call `myFun(a)`. beca
5.
by disconcision 6mo ago
speed of plane is about 3% speed of satellite so i wouldn't expect handoffs to be much more frequent than with stationary receivers?
6.
by disconcision 6mo ago
i can't speak for everyone, but in the above assertion am using 'roughly exponential' to mean that world population between say 1880 and 1960 followed a curve that is, roughly, exponential, in the technical sense. much of the
7.
by disconcision 6mo ago
we had nearly 2 centuries of roughly exponential growth. ended in the 60s but not everyone got the memo
8.
by disconcision 6mo ago
> so no operator precedence seems like a massive foot-gun how do you mean? given that spec, ambiguous code just won't compile. that could potentially be inefficient, but not a foot gun.
9.
by disconcision 7mo ago
not obvious to me this makes things better as opposed to worse? sure, the time bound helps but in the runup to a crunch won't we get vastly more devices in causal range at an asymptotically increasing rate?
10.
by disconcision 7mo ago
never thought about it before but after playing with it a while i notice i tend to approach from the right, which means moving out if i'm inside on the right side. i think this is because my positioning accuracy seems to be higher movi
11.
by disconcision 8mo ago
for better or for worse, most specific scientific jargon is already going to be in english
12.
by disconcision 8mo ago
I've yet to be convinced by any article, including this one, that attempts to draw boxes around what coding agents are and aren't good at in a way that is robust on a 6 to 12 month horizon. I agree that the examples listed here ar
13.
by disconcision 9mo ago
I actually did something similar recently for my website* and it was actually a Claude failure case; helped a little but ultimately cost me more time than doing it entirely myself. For my version I wanted the actual book spine images; since
14.
by disconcision 10mo ago
with the exception that it doesn't seem possible to fully disable this for grok 4
15.
by disconcision 10mo ago
you can (via the api, or to a lesser degree through the setting in the web client) determine what tools if any a model can use
16.
by disconcision 11mo ago
in defense of my upvote i copy-pasted the title into google in a new tab and then forgot that i had done so
17.
by disconcision 1y ago
wait until you find out about human programmers...
18.
by disconcision 1y ago
this is somewhat true but i'm not sure how load bearing it is. for one, i think it's going to be a while until 'we asked the model what bob said' is as admissible as the result of a database query
19.
by disconcision 1y ago
OKLCH plus relative colors let me seriously reduce the amount of hardcoded colors from my style sheet: https://github.com/hazelgrove/hazel/blob/dev/src/web/www/sty...
20.
by disconcision 1y ago
interesting!! is BABLR yours? is there a page that talks about your error-correcting/embedding-gaps approach? couldn't immediate find one in the docs. btw new version of tylr (hazel's core editing engine) is multi-language fr
21.
by disconcision 1y ago
there are approaches to ensure you always or almost always have syntactic validity, e.g. structured editing or error correcting parsing, though of course it's true that the more permissive the system is the more tortured some of the sy
22.
by disconcision 1y ago
i feel it's not quite that simple. certainly the changes you suggest make the paper more straightforwardly defensible. i imagine the reason they included the problematic assertion is that they (correctly) understood the question would
23.
by disconcision 1y ago
it brought my 16-core desktop with 24gb GPU to a crawl, perhaps the only time a website has done that. impressive tbh
24.
by disconcision 1y ago
this might work https://nitter.space/disconcision/search?q=from%3Adisconcisi...
25.
by disconcision 1y ago
unfortunately the best source for examples and screenshots at the moment might be a search of my twitter feed: https://x.com/search?q=from%3Adisconcision%20hazel ... we need to update the website
26.
by disconcision 1y ago
llm hole filling ala the paper is actually live in the dev version right now (if you enter an openrouter API key in the second sidebar tab). it's slow and buggy at the moment though, it's only been running at all for the last few
27.
by disconcision 1y ago
i'm not convinced takeover is a fair description. its true that functional languages are over-represented in the more theory-laden subfields, but this is in on small part because functional languages are easier to reason about. 'r
28.
by disconcision 1y ago
> used to remark that the the Matrix is the kind of movie the matrix would make to think you've won. The Wachowskis who are very American did not understand S&S to be fair this is explicitly a theme in the (imo unjustly maligned
29.
by disconcision 1y ago
this is not quite right. haskell and scheme have if expressions, not if statements. that's not the same as if being a function. if is not, and cannot be, a function in scheme, as it does not have scheme function semantics. specifically
30.
by disconcision 1y ago
Here's a similar example using lean widgets (in the live programming part of the talk): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5LOYzZx-0c

More ›