Cool, I think at this point, since there's a few Clojure Go dialect, what I'd like to understand most is which one is fully hosted on Go, has as good interop as JVM Clojure has with Java, where I can both use what I make from Go, and also use Go from Clojure, and even create mixed projects would be nice. And also, truly details the differences, beyond interrop, what is not the same and differs.
I think Gloat/Glojure has the best hosted runtime story because of its AOT to Go src pipeline - you can grab anything Go at compile time. OTOH let-go can roundtrip any Go value including structs, functions and channels but it does not allow pulling arbitrary go libs without wrapping them up first - they'd need to be built into the runtime for this.
Not OP. For this particular use case, I think performance is a primary concern.
But if you mean in general, I also totally feel that languages that let you represent more invariants statically are better fit for LLMs. I'd love to see experimentation with LLMs with dependent types and managed effects.
You can't really compare them to Microsoft, Oracle, or Meta. Those companies aren't cutting costs because AI replaced their own employees. They're pouring money into AI infrastructure and models because they want to sell that capacity to others.
Their thinking is more: instead of funding another internal product team, they can redirect that payroll spend into more AI compute and models they hope to monetize.
I don't believe CloudFlare is doing that, though they might, they could be needing to spend in Edge AI compute and what not, building out that infra isn't free, so they might need to find places the cash will come from.
> A company finds itself with surplus labor capacity due to the efficiencies in AI
It's likely more:
A company finds itself with surplus labor capacity due to the over hiring during Covid, cutting down on risky ventures, protecting margins, and narrowing scope.
But I think there's also:
A company wants to see if AI is making them more efficient, decides to cut people as if it was and see what happens.
I also am not sure about the short term stock price, many recent mass layoffs the stock often moved down. The CloudFlare stock is tanking in after market for example.
As long as you didn’t sell, and in fact bought more on the way down, you did well. Of course, not everyone’s time horizon works the timing (you might need the money and so sell at a low point), but generally, being in the market pays off.
It kind of depends what we mean. If you're conservatively in the market, invested in the aggregate economy, diversified, and what not, yes, but if you're taking bets on a smaller number of companies you can just lose your money full on. Not every single company recovers from a recession.
That's why if you are a business, the risk of a recession is a real threat. Someone will recapture your market once the recession is over, but will you?
That also means people will lose their jobs, price of goods will rise, the pressure to need to dip into one's savings will increase, forcing many people into cashing out at the worse possible time. If you are someone with that risk, as an individual, a recession is a real threat as well, and you might want to reduce your market exposure beforehand.
I wouldn't mind waiting longer for answers that would go through a better model with more thinking. As long as it has good support for interrupting and also it doesn't start answering as soon as I pause for 1 second and it's smart about knowing I'm done speaking.
1. Tallying the total water consumption impact, embodied water (construction), operational water (cooling), indirect water (electricity generation), supply chain water, etc.
2. Mapping current water intensity onto AI growth forecasts through 2030+
And if you look at those things in combination, there are reasons to be alarmed.
Do you have any specific questions? The request for "what's wrong with Apple software" is about the size of a Wikipedia page to answer and what people are saying in the comments seems quite clear to me. Since you're referring to comments, but none in particular, I'm not sure what parts you want an elaboration on. It might also help to just ask in a thread that has information you find unclear
It has become very buggy in recent years. Lots of glitches. And the liquid glass fiasco didn’t help.
Historically there were so few bugs in Apple’s software that to encounter even one was a jarring experience. Now they’ve reverted to the mean, and it’s just as buggy as Windows or Android. So if you’re comparing with them, no big deal. But compared to Apple standards we’ve fallen a long way.
That's a very weird choice. I can understand people buying them for the integration with the Apple ecosystem, but outside of it they're just dumb bluetooth earphones. There are better alternatives.
Instead of being curious why someone would make a choice you didn't, you chose to attack the choice! You might as well stick your fingers in your ears and go "na na na I can't hear you!" until you find a tribe of fellow haters.
In my experience, they work much better, their bluetooth connectivity and the way both of them are in sync is top notch. I also find their ergonomics the best for comfort, battery, how the case works, etc. And they have one of the best microphone for calls and how audible you are to the other person while not picking up too much noise.
This is tangential but somehow fits here. I tried multiple wired and bluetooth earphones/headphones with my switch 2. And the only ones that gave the sound that was acceptable to me, were the airpods. I had the Sony WHX… headphones, I also tried them using an aux cable, I had a few aux wired earphones (skullcandy and some others), all of their output was weak.
I am not even sure how that’s possible, I don’t understand sound/music quality as much, but I was genuinely surprised by this.
It’s a logical choice. They are good and not that expensive. The whole "they only fit with other Apple devices" is misleading. They work better with a Mac than a Windows PC, sure, but on that Windows PC they work as well as the really good alternatives. None of the supposedly better alternatives are better in every aspect. It’s a tradeoff.
>but on that Windows PC they work as well as the really good alternatives.
I know I'm a rather late here and essentially just ranting a bit while waiting for github to finally do as it is told, sorry :)
But that's exactly the (frustrating) issue - as I've laid out in another post - no, they don't work as well.
It's not about others being better in every aspect (yeah, they usually aren't), but about expected baseline features that are simply missing.
(And to be honest, I've become a bit jaded regarding the resulting discussions :) No, that thing doesn't just suck in general. No, it's not impossible. It's Apple's implementation. External Display Support flashbacks incoming ;) )
A skill cannot provide MCPs and can't provide custom template prompts, each skill is it's own slash command.
A plugin you can define N number of custom slash commands, and you can define MCPs as well as skills. So it bundles like all the things together.
By installing a plugin, you are basically installing a bunch of MCPs, skills and custom slash command prompts.
reply