Oh wow, now I want a chain of thought rewriter that makes the combination of chat and CoT put together follow this style

Click show details in chatgpt deep research for such a tale except instead of noir it's "Office Space".

Oh wow, I had to try this and as expected it's amazing. Trying to design interesting algorithms that also look good is a lot of fun, and the result is surprisingly readable.

It takes some getting used to symbols that can be confused when upside down such as b or brackets (like the symbols for begin/end)

Like others I am curious about doing it for a lisp or Forth

Isn't it more about the demo of what you can build than the paragraph? I feel like the text would only give a small amount of the information this demo gives

Are there any particular techniques or styles that stand out to you as useful when prototyping in Rust?

`clone()` and `unwrap()` and `todo!()` without fear. Just let it loose.

For me, prototyping is, IMO, about finding shortcuts to demonstrate something that is unknown to you. The idea is that shortcuts represent things you know how to do, but would otherwise take work to avoid and aren't necessary for demonstrating the thing that is unknown. `clone()` and `unwrap()` are just Rust-specific examples of that.

As Sam Harris has discussed several times, if you run the thought experiment of what is definitely real and not to its conclusion, subjective experience is the only thing that cannot be faked as it does not make any claim beyond the experience itself. Even if there is no real world out there, you're just sitting on a hard drive in a super computer being simulated, your subjective experience was proven to be true the moment you experienced it.

There is a distance between your experience and the shared reality (a bunch of signals, perception and processing) that we use science to try to overcome

Thanks, this is another way of explaining what I was trying to convey.

I think one of the big missing pieces in your parent comment about choice and negative externalities has to do with this network effect and I do not think the argument that it can be overcome locally is a very compelling counter.

It certainly is a difficult thing to do, but we see it happen time and time again. TikTok is now the biggest app, and it was nowhere a few years ago. Same with things like Insta, What's app, Signal, etc.

It is definitely a hard thing to overcome but not impossible. Especially as people become more privacy focused. I, for example, have had zero luck moving my family to Signal, and I'm the only non iPhone in the family network with my grapheneos phone and receive constant complaints about how I mess up group threads.

It's convenient to run the lint step faster/sooner than at CI/CD time. Depending on your setup, the separate linter deps handled by pre-commit can be more convenient than hassle both locally and in your CI/CD pipeline (re the makefile script you mention).

Having done it both ways several times I lean pre-commit for now

You've already run them at edit time.

I'm not sure how Twitter works, but for YouTube it's not like their recommendation system is a perfect user-friendly algorithm.

While it is your choice what to click, what you end up watching is a result of the interplay between you and what is recommended to you and if the recommendation system was different, both what you click and the resulting feed would be different as well

Experimented with this on YouTube. My recommendations are exactly the things that I watched.

In fact I got kind of bored because I wanted something new and different, instead I just get more videos of exactly the same type.

If I stop watching a certain kind of video it eventually stops showing up on the recommendations.

Your earlier argument about unsubscribe being effectively an informal termination only works if you properly separate that side from all promotional/marketing/new features/etc material, otherwise it seems you are avoiding the main point and purpose of the unsubscribe button

I've been in this situation many times too, but I have to say it feels like a weakness. When a single person works on a problem I see improvements being left on the table compared to when two people effectively collaborate. I've experienced this in a wide range of skill/experience levels so I don't think that is the problem.

That said, I don't know how to change the situation if you have devs with skillsets that don't seem to overlap much, which seems inevitable for some companies