tel

10 ms·

1.
by tel 15d ago
I've been spending the last couple months working on a Markdown-like lightweight document format. (Short pitch, it's like Markdown but with natural extension points built in and far less subtlety). A huge part of my goal is to wri
2.
by tel 21d ago
To be fair, that wasn’t my issue. I don’t find it annoying. I find it misleading and nigh fraudulent.
3.
by tel 21d ago
I think it’s because it’s reasonable to believe that the human author had no meaningful contribution. If he’d written “by Claude with direction from me” then I’d feel more comfortable. If he’d hand written in his own voice a methods section
4.
by tel 21d ago
I think the point was that Claude’s output can be somewhat easily and compellingly measured using this technique and its kind of massive (and human attributed).
5.
by tel 22d ago
I appreciate the connection to artists guiding their teams. I think that's a good analogy. At the same time, when Koons or Chihuly or Cummins sign their work I do have that expectation that they guided the piece in a meaningful and mat
6.
by tel 22d ago
I'm not able to judge this for content, but it feels frustrating to read something so obviously Claude-authored as being written "by" Jude Gomila. It's interesting to see the (presumed correct) reduction in this bound an
7.
by tel 1mo ago
Increasingly, I've begun to think of LLMs as sources of really interesting random objects: large pieces of "reasonable thinking" conditioned on a task. It's not that these are correct, in general, but instead they'r
8.
by tel 1mo ago
In short, simplify the design to make it more reasonable for multiple implementations to agree while also adding intentional extensibility points and a governance model that allows for dialects to form without fracturing the community. Mark
9.
by tel 1mo ago
I'm working on an improved Markdown that offers a simplified language, clear hooks for extensibility, and a governance model to let it grow over time.
10.
by tel 2mo ago
An assert statement requires that you specifically come up with a test case. Lean lets you verify for all possible cases . Infinity is not a problem. It's similar to a type system in that regard. The same difference could be applied t
11.
by tel 2mo ago
Without having any opinion on whether or not the Bun team was meaningfully fuzzing their codebase... Andrew's claim was not about whether or not they were, it was noting that the story was different between what they claimed in convers
12.
by tel 2mo ago
It's also a language of distancing from personal experience and honesty. Not saying you're wrong. Professionalism is an important tool for maintaining professional relationships. Lack of professionalism is dangerous to the point w
13.
by tel 3mo ago
I think you've got it. You go in each day and work on things and talk with people working on things. There are multiple opportunities to share weekly, one or two are pretty regular and the rest are self-organized. Maybe you learn about
14.
by tel 3mo ago
I'm working on an easy-to-embed typed language called Ekto. I am taking a lot of inspiration from Koka and aiming to support full multi-shot delimited continuations all while keeping the virtual machine deeply predictable from the host
15.
by tel 5mo ago
I was asking questions about compiler techniques. Then when I got annoyed I started asking about experimental design. Both were very frustrating experiences once I started realizing how limited its responses were. Though yeah the edgelord-y
16.
by tel 5mo ago
All my usage of Grok for technical topics shows it regularly deeply misunderstanding things and just parroting back my question in fancy language. It’s the only frontier model I get this impression of. That makes it super annoying when it t
17.
by tel 8mo ago
I think, yes, with greater splat density—and, critically, more and better inputs to train on, others have stated that these performances were captured with 56 RealSense D455fs—then splats will more accurately estimate light at more angles a
18.
by tel 8mo ago
Gaussian splatting is a way to record 3-dimensional video. You capture a scene from many angles simultaneously and then combine all of those into a single representation. Ideally, that representation is good enough that you can then, post-p
19.
by tel 8mo ago
Definitely not common! Nice to hear I'm not alone either. And yeah, I agree. Practically, it's the thing that annoys me the most day-to-day. I've mostly got wrapping set up to handle it now, but it remains a little finicky.
20.
by tel 8mo ago
I've recently begun replacing Markdown with Gemini's .gmi/gemtext format. It is Markdown with fewer features. I appreciate the simplicity and it's tremendously easy for custom tools to parse. It has no inline formatting,
21.
by tel 10mo ago
SDFs still scale by geometry complexity, though. It costs instructions to evaluate each SDF component. You could still use something like BvH (or Matt Keeter’s interval arithmetic trick) to speed things up.
22.
by tel 11mo ago
Genuine question, how does SPIR-V compare with CUDA? Why is SPIR-V in a trench coat less desirable? What is it about Metal that makes it SPIR-V in a trench coat (assuming that's what you meant)?
23.
by tel 1y ago
At the same time, if you want to use Claude to read the source and narrate how it works to you that’s trivial to do as a user.
24.
by tel 1y ago
If you're familiar with Zorn's Lemma, the construction is just to order bases by inclusion and to consider chains created by noting that there must be an independent dimension and adding it inductively. You can upper bound each of
25.
by tel 1y ago
Yeah, that's correct. You also often see it as having that for any method `X -> T<Y>` there's a corresponding method `T<X> -> T<Y>`. Or you can have that for any two arrows `X -> T<Y>` and `Y ->
26.
by tel 1y ago
Every monad is also an applicative and liftA2 does/is the same thing as liftM2. The only reason they both exist was due to Monad being popularized in Haskell earlier than Applicative and thus not having it as a superclass until the Fun
27.
by tel 1y ago
Monad tutorials are on the rise again. Let's start with function composition. We know that for any two types A and B we can consider functions from A to B, written A -> B. We can also compose them, the heart of sequentiality. If f
28.
by tel 1y ago
The more constrained your theory is, the fewer models you have of it and also the more structure you can exploit. Monads, I think, offer enough structure in that we can exploit things like monad composition (as fraught as it is), monadic do
29.
by tel 1y ago
I’m not a huge fan of these, but this time I noticed that the best ones feel a lot like naturality arguments. As in, moving structural bits in a way that makes it clear that we’re not touching anything that ought to be universally quantifia
30.
by tel 1y ago
Often it's easy to construct a family of sets representing something of interest. For example, we like to define integration initially as a finite process of breaking the integrand's domain into pieces, computing their area, and s

More ›