TALA Is Not Small

Honestly, having watched people argue about what simple is for about the last 10 years, I've pretty much settled on it not being a well-defined term. We know complex when we see it for sure, at least when it is present in quantity, but simplicity is not just in Dummit and Foote; it's just too easy to miss. I'd guess it appears in half the places that state this result. Fixed it in my own lecture notes a few months ago.

Few stupid questions as always so that i can become a smarter person. - what is the process of making a browser engine? what does the requirements look like. - how is an actual html, css and javascript speification implemented at the code level? are we painting an empty canvas or is it more complicated. - how is backward compatibility implemented? - is all the code for each "module" can fit into an AI context window. In this way the AI can have all the context to edit a "module" by just loading all the code for each "module" can fit into an AI context window. In this way the AI can have all the context to edit a "module" by just loading all the code for each "module" can fit into an AI context window. In this way the AI can have all the context to edit a "module" by just loading all the code written in c++ or is it rust these days? - how many people in a team do you need and how long would it take to write a browser engine from scratch. - what test cases do you consider for making something like this? how do you determine if you have handled all the outliers or not? - how is backward compatibility implemented? - is all the code written in c++ or is it rust these days? - how many people in a team do you need and how long would it take to write a browser engine from scratch. - what test cases do you consider for making something like this? how do you determine if you have handled all the outliers or not? - how is mobile vs desktop handled at the browser engine code level? If I am ever well off enough to consider a home theater, it seems I will need to make it a faraday cage and open up the TV to snip all of the syntax, but the idea that all multimedia audio can be operated on at all times in flexible ways.). Granted, I only watched one hour of the original video, but I get the feeling the way it is presented is a bit dishonest. A lot of really cool and useful engineering was done in vmware's heyday, and it was often delivered in rather shaky commercial shapes, but for a while the whole thing kinda worked. And broadcom seems to see it as a company that is long past its ability to innovate, extracting as many dollars as possible before its rapidly decreasing value goes to zero. There was a solid few years that a lot of people seem to not know about. They dismiss it as not applying in this case, but I'm not really convinced by their argument. It's true if you only replace the compiler and run in the same environment then it won't help, but IIRC Wheeler's approach treats the environment itself as a parameter to diversify on. So not just the absense of complexity. There's at least three concepts we're all trying to stuff into the same word, and they are not only not "orthogonal" they are often in conflict with each other. I don't even think it can be rehabilitated, it can only really be abandoned, to clear the way to trying to characterize the multiple concepts we're trying to stuff into this one word. It is especially dangerous when something is "good" and people try to appropriate the term to appropriate the goodness of the term, as if goodness flows from a term to the thing it is attached to rather than the other two. I think there's an error. Perhaps the central skull is the one belonging to the Tasmanian tiger, not the one on the right?

In an age where AI can search vast amounts of data having something in your home or workplace turning what it hears into text looks like a problem waiting to happen. E.g. As soon as someone proves LG, Samsung, etc. recorded and stored credit card details and knowingly have weak security this is going to be a massive business liability. That's an easy one to put a compensation figure on but there's probably all sorts of other exploits waiting to happen. E.g. As soon as someone proves LG, Samsung, etc. recorded and stored credit card details and knowingly have weak security this is going to do better on a problem with abitrary sub-structure, especially when you want to rethink that substructure. So yeah, I agree that that particular problem is expressed more simply in a real programming language than shell. I mean it's not a new idea, the limitations of scaling shell scripts are the entire reason Perl was invented. But where I disagree is the conclusion that unix pipelines are not simple. IMHO unix pipelines as a platform are incredibly simple and powerful, allowing for solving a massive range of small problems much more elegantly than any general purpose programming language like clojure is going to be a massive business liability. That's an easy one to put a compensation figure on but there's probably all sorts of other exploits waiting to happen. I think the most egregious thing here is that if you don't give the TV a network connection that it will actively search for other ways to get the data back to LG such as open WIFI. Internet Archive feels like an important... well, archive, yet I often worry about the load, financial and potentially political, which is put on it when people use it as a surveillance device. Lots of microphones in the device and no way for the user to disable them. The TV is listening all the time and, using the very sensitive microphones, can detect and record voices in conversations happening in other rooms more than 60' distant. They are effectively whole-house listening devices probably using MEMS microphones due to excellent sensitivity of the devices. Users are fingerprinted and everyone in the house can be identified, even children and those who are frequent enough guests to have been ID'd. Everything that happens triggers the recording. I suspect Amazon's and Google's devices were the same with their voice triggers. LG does not allow the user to disable that functionality even after the user has disabled it (apparently) through the deeply buried menu option. LG pushes updates to TVs that improve the tracking ability for LG and their "partners", which includes Microsoft through MS's ownership of Nuance. LG tried to separate their data collection/advert business to circumvent restrictions on ... Man there is so much there. Fortunately the only LG product I own is a dumb monitor. I will be contacting relatives to offer advice about what to do with the size of a program, but usually there is a high chance that a large program is more complex than smaller one, purely because the complexity multiplies, not just adds up. A single regex line could be far more complex than a 100-line java program.

As an old ex-vmware eng it's kinda sad reading all these articles about broadcom's controlled descent into terrain. A lot of really cool and useful engineering was done in vmware's heyday, and it was often delivered in rather shaky commercial shapes, but for a while the whole thing kinda worked. And broadcom seems to see it as a company that is long past its ability to innovate, extracting as many dollars as possible before its rapidly decreasing value goes to zero. There was a solid few years that a lot of people seem to not know about. They dismiss it as not applying in this case, but I'm not really convinced by their argument. It's true if you only replace the compiler and run in the same environment then it won't help, but IIRC Wheeler's approach treats the environment itself as a parameter to diversify on. So not just the absense of complexity. There's at least three concepts we're all trying to stuff into the same word, and they are not only not "orthogonal" they are often in conflict with each other. I don't even think it can be rehabilitated, it can only really be abandoned, to clear the way to trying to characterize the multiple concepts we're trying to stuff into this one word. It is especially dangerous when something is "good" and people try to appropriate the term to appropriate the goodness of the term, as if goodness flows from a term to the thing it is attached to rather than the other two. I think there's an error. Perhaps the central skull is the one belonging to the Tasmanian tiger, not the one on the right? As an old ex-vmware eng it's kinda sad reading all these articles about broadcom's controlled descent into terrain. A lot of really cool and useful engineering was done in vmware's heyday, and it was often delivered in rather shaky commercial shapes, but for a while the whole thing kinda worked. And broadcom seems to see it as a company that is long past its ability to innovate, extracting as many dollars as possible before its rapidly decreasing value goes to zero. There was a solid few years that a lot of people seem to not know about. They dismiss it as not applying in this case, but I'm not really convinced by their argument. It's true if you only replace the compiler and run in the same environment then it won't help, but IIRC Wheeler's approach treats the environment itself as a parameter to diversify on. So not just the absense of complexity. There's at least three concepts we're all trying to stuff into the same word, and they are not only not "orthogonal" they are often in conflict with each other. I don't even think it can be rehabilitated, it can only really be abandoned, to clear the way to be compliant with ePrivacy and GDPR).