Ah this has reminded me of dejanews.com the usenet archive. Before the days of Stack Overflow that was absolute gold for looking up an error message or code issue.
If I remember rightly Google bought the data when they shutdown and incorporated it into Google Groups.
I decided years ago to limit myself to just one box of cables... So then I ended up having to keep finding a bigger and bigger box to switch them to.
One thing that bothers me though (or an excuse my brain uses to justify it maybe) is that it feels so wasteful to dump so many cables that will probably end up in landfill when I know there's someone out there who could make use of them.
If anyone has a suggestion on that or can tell me about the pop up local cable donation swap initiative I haven't heard of them that would be welcome.
Someone should make a noncommercial website that allows people to post their collection. I bet there's enough people out there willing to share their cables for free just for the delight of having one of their cables being useful to someone for some reason
> One thing that bothers me though (or an excuse my brain uses to justify it maybe) is that it feels so wasteful to dump so many cables that will probably end up in landfill when I know there's someone out there who could make use of them.
This prevents me from throwing away a lot of stuff. I can't stand the idea of this stuff just going into a landfill somewhere, adding to the world's pollution. I feel like every time I put something into the trash, I might as well be beating a baby seal with a baseball bat. I also put a (perhaps insane) amount of effort into reusing things and avoiding buying things in the first place, because I know eventually it will be polluting the world.
Often I just set up a folding table at the curb, and put my boxes of stuff there with a sign that says "free". Yes, I know the next person might throw it away, but somehow it's easier to ignore that fact.
Some thrift stores will take them, if you have a good one nearby (I’ve been lucky here, but they’re rare). You can also put a note on your local freebie groups and someone might bite. In some cities you can leave them bagged outside your house with a note and they’ll be gone in hours. On some tech forum classifieds, people would give away cables and junk fans for the cost of the postage.
I keep a lot of wires around because my interests and work require that, and I find great pleasure in being able to connect anything at a whim. Right now they're all pretty tidy, sorted by role into not-giant boxes on a shelf. I don't have too much any particular type, and every one I do have works with currently-used technology.
It wasn't always that way, though -- I used to collect and keep all of the cables. It was quite a burden.
10 years ago or so, I went through them all and sorted them. I got rid of hundreds of pounds of cables.
Those that went away were all broadly useless to modern society, or duplicates, or both.
I did think about taking some to a thrift store but, I mean: I see the same used wires on the shelves there sometimes for months or years: People don't want them. And I wasn't about to landfill them.
So I decided to recycle them by selling them as scrap.
In my case, with the scrap yard near me: They offered me a much better price without connectors on the wires than with them. So I cut all the ends off, bagged up all those bits of insulated copper wire, and sold them by the pound. It took a fair bit of time to prep all that stuff for scrap, but meh: I made a rather decent hourly wage doing it and felt like I was working towards the right goal.
Since this transaction gave them value, I can be reasonably certain that they got made into something instead of just being dumped into a hole in the ground.
---
If direct re-use is very important: You can sell them on eBay, I guess. There's buyers there. But then you're doing all of the things that selling cheap stuff on eBay requires and that sounds like an awful way to spend time.
Otherwise, the prospects are bad. Even at hamfest fleamarkets in Ohio, people don't usually bring in collections of old miscellaneous cables. A special programming cable for a Yaesu radio? Sure! 50 feet of LMR-400 coax? Why not.
Yet-another USB A-to-B printer cable? No, nobody wants that (we already have our own burdensome stash), and even if they do then nobody wants to scan through all of the old computer power cords and audio cables to find that printer cable any more than you want to sort it all out for for display and perusal.
If the money isn't important and the main goal is to avoid the landfill, then: Just put them on Craigslist or FB marketplace (or whatever regional variation works where you are) for free, in bulk. Someone will pick them up. Whether they think they're finding a pile of scrap to get some tax-free beer money from or some kind of hidden treasure doesn't really matter.
Or, in the right neighborhood: Put them in a pile on the curb so that people can see them. They'll simply disappear.
> If direct re-use is very important: You can sell them on eBay, I guess. There's buyers there. But then you're doing all of the things that selling cheap stuff on eBay requires and that sounds like an awful way to spend time.
Yea, I would love to get a few bucks each for all this crap, but eBay sucks as a small time seller. I've got to take some pictures of each thing, guess how much it's going to cost to ship (or list free shipping and eat the cost) post it, wait for it to sell (or for the auction to end), go buy a cardboard box or mailer for it, go buy packaging/stuffing to protect it, go buy packing tape to tape the box up, go to USPS, UPS or whatever, to finally mail it off, and then wonder if you're going to be hit by the nonzero probability that the buyer is a scammer and will cause a problem. Repeat for each little thing you want to sell.
I wish eBay was more like consignment. Ship them off a big box-of-stuff, they pay you a small amount for it, and then it's their problem to sell and distribute.
> I really think its just unknowable how a world after superintelligence will look.
I'd argue that there would be more unknowables without AGI than with it, should be obvious, right?
Open superintelligence is more likely to help than to harm, I mean, it can reduce P(doom) which is quite high without it due to the apparent lack of human intelligence, also suppressed by conflicts of interest and unchecked greed.
There's hope that something really intelligent can convince the politicians to legislate and enforce effective guardrails against biological weapons, what we have now is one fat joke, international treaties are an even fatter joke. Then we have climate, pollution, finance, disease, etc problems which we seem unable to resolve with mere human intelligence.
These days in my experience most people don't use a sidechain signal, just chop out, or filter, enough of the first base note so that it doesn't clash with the kick. People still refer to it as "sidechain" just because historically that's what it was. Most popular plugin to achieve this is LFOTool but also Shaperbox is used now too which is nice as it lets you cut in frequency ranges in different amounts. Its all about making it gel with the kick. You want your bass to be powerful but in the modern sound you always want the kick to win.
Yes phase alignment is important too. There's always a sweet spot where it just sounds "right". Plus staring endlessly at an oscilloscope to check they aren't interfering. Then doing it for hours and hours and wondering at the end if it sounded better before you started mucking around with it actually but your ears are so tired of it you can't tell anymore.
This stuff is such a rabbit hole. Lots of fun though.
This has reminded me of the awe felt by 12 year old me when someone showed me that you could use a hole punch to make a hole in the corner of a single sided 3.5" disk to double the capacity.
Adult me is now going to go look into how or why that worked.
It feels to me as though LLMs should (eventually?) really shine at these kinds of tasks where the intent is already defined in code of some sort and the challenge of the task is lots of detailed legwork that humans find hard, more because it's time consuming and not interesting so hard to focus on, rather than because it's technically challenging.
So swapping languages, yeah maybe, but I expect of more practical use would be the situation where you inherit a legacy codebase in an ancient version of a language or framework that hasn't been loved in a long time. I saw this so many times when doing dev team for hire work.
Obviously you'd want to do boat loads of testing and there may well be manual work left to do afterwards, but I think it would be the kind of manual work that felt like you were polishing something new and clean and beautiful rather than trying to apply bits of sticky tape to something unmaintainable.
I also wonder about eventually being able to say to an LLM "take this codebase and make it look like my code", or maybe one of your favourite open source developer's code. Maybe everyone could end up with their own code style vector attached to their github profile describing their style. You could find devs with styles close to yours to work on your team, or maybe find devs with styles different to yours so you could go and argue about tabs vs spaces or something.
That's it precisely. I'm working on the exact same thing GPT-migrate is doing, but I'm approaching it from the other direction first. My project is trying to generate a test suite that aims to cover the full original functionality (bug for bug as they say). That way a tool like GPT-migrate has a much better chance of generating the translation without errors and whoever uses it can have more confidence in that the output will be correct.
I'm a bit intimidated that Josh came so close in just a week of work but it's also inspiring confidence that this is the right track and it's actually going to work when all the puzzle pieces fall into place.
edit: damn, this project actually creates rudimentary tests as well. It's such a lean approach, makes me feel like I'm still coding in 2022 when Josh is firmly in 2023.
I agree! This is a pretty elegant approach and while like you I haven't fully internalized the 2023 way of building AI native product, I'm inspired and increasingly confident in how much can be accomplished in a lean way.
> take this codebase and make it look like my code
That's exactly what LLMs don't do. In my experience, there is no way to convince ChatGPT (even v4) to follow any conventions or obey any rules. It might try a bit, but it always ends up writing everything its own way, usually as verbosely as possible.
You are 100% false on this one, especially with GPT-4. I can take entire vanilla JS functions, and ask the language model to rewrite them using typescript, snake case naming conventions, and show it a block of other code that I've written to adhere to the same structure including jsdocs and it nails it nearly every time.
In your example, you are asking GPT-4 to rewrite code from one public style to another public style. I was saying that LLMs cannot reflect your personal style, because they know nothing about it. Even when instructed at length and provided with short examples (that fit in the context window), they always gravitate to the public average.
Then you're doing something wrong because it's exactly what it does for me.
> Given this schema
... some create statement for a table
> Use this as a template
... some unrelated function
> I want you to implement this
... some pseudo code
> So swapping languages, yeah maybe, but I expect of more practical use would be the situation where you inherit a legacy codebase in an ancient version of a language or framework that hasn't been loved in a long time. I saw this so many times when doing dev team for hire work.
I'm exploring this problem space - this is a wide spread pain point across almost all companies that are older than 3 years old. I've seen this at tech startups as well as very large companies and anything in between. Dropbox is arguably a top tier engineering organization that probably manages tech debt as responsibly as can be expected and they still had to make major investments to move their codebase forward from various eras of web tech
1) https://dropbox.tech/frontend/the-great-coffeescript-to-type...
2) https://dropbox.tech/frontend/edison-webserver-a-faster-more...
Everyone else is much worse off so the investment required to move forward is usually immense. This leads to full rewrites. Which is nice but error prone and sometimes entails huge opportunity costs
> Obviously you'd want to do boat loads of testing and there may well be manual work left to do afterwards, but I think it would be the kind of manual work that felt like you were polishing something new and clean and beautiful rather than trying to apply bits of sticky tape to something unmaintainable.
Agreed. In my opinion, now's a great time to get started with a semi automated approach like this while betting that the program synthesis and code generation capabilities will rapidly improve over the next few years. Larger context windows, solutions for hallucinations / reliability and better training data will help reduce the manual labor required.
> I also wonder about eventually being able to say to an LLM "take this codebase and make it look like my code", or maybe one of your favourite open source developer's code. Maybe everyone could end up with their own code style vector attached to their github profile describing their style. You could find devs with styles close to yours to work on your team, or maybe find devs with styles different to yours so you could go and argue about tabs vs spaces or something.
I've been thinking that personal style / training / fine tuning could become somewhat of an asset. "You are a principal software engineer at Google with particular expertise migrating codebases from {sourcelang} to {targetlang}." works fine but imagining a much richer portable input would possibly be quite valuable.
I’ve encountered lots of companies that keep paying license fees to oracle for DBs that could just as well be Postgres but for the work of updating and testing the code…
It grinds my gears a little bit when people pretend that Google came out of nowhere and invented a new paradigm for accessing information and making money by selling ads there.
It was a well recognized problem they solved with Page rank!
It isn't really for learning theory but more for wielding it to write chords.
I use it as a VST in Ableton but you can use it standalone.
I also started learning piano as an adult around 6 years ago and have mostly been trying to use it to understand the theory to compose and improvise rather than perform. The more theory I learnt the more bits of Scaler made sense and I think half recognising concepts from Scaler as my piano teacher was explaining them at the piano was a help.
Also one other thing that I want to stress as I see it - some of theory is based on fundamental truths to do with clashing frequencies but also some of it is just trying to put a framework around what we already know sounds good, and the ultimate rule for music I think is, if it sounds good, it is good. Good luck!
Its been very interesting to watch all of this play out. FTX going under feels somehow bigger than Gox, bigger than the DAO. Gox looked like it was held together by bits of string, the DAO was always something new and had the potential to be a risk, but FTX seeemed safe as houses.
For crypto to exist in the regular world, its always seemed like more regulation of some sort is inevitable. Particularly for a company like FTX with US ties, and it looked like SBF was starting to cosy up to the regulators and fit himself in among the powers that be in the US. His big political donations, sports sponsorships, philanthropic funds. It looked to me like a person who believed in the idealism of crypto was fitting himself into the old world, and all of this lended credence to FTX being trustworthy.
In the end his views on regulation went too far for many and this was strangely the thing that led exposing the dodgy things going on behind the curtain (with the leak of the balance sheet, and CZ saying he would exit his FTT).
That said, Alameda Research, the trading arm, were clearly no slouches, they used to be up there on the Bitmex leaderboard and it seems so hard to grok that they couldn't have modelled all of this risk properly. Accounting for who is holding large amounts of FTT and the price impact that could have.
I sort of feel there must be more to it, or maybe, then again, it just comes down to the same thing that's caused many other crypto funds to blow up - simple greed. The collateral is sitting there, so why use it. What's the worst that can happen?
> it seems so hard to grok that they couldn't have modelled all of this risk properly
I think they did, but their management got greedy and overly hopeful that Bitcoin was going to break 100k last year. This is a trend in crypto for quite a while now: companies get big when the price increases, then get overly complacent and greedy when the market turns.
Remember, you can have perfectly simulated risk assessments, only to have your boss say: "but we want to risk it anyway" and just ignore your protests.
Gox was always dodgy as shit, and FTX felt even more dodgy. Especially its bossman having a raging hardon for tradfi regulations.
> His big political donations, sports sponsorships, philanthropic funds. It looked to me like a person who believed in the idealism of crypto was fitting himself into the old world, and all of this lended credence to FTX being trustworthy.
All of that made FTX seem even less trustworthy to me tbh. Much, much less trustworthy.
I have a beast of a desktop PC but still find myself getting into console games far more than PC games.
I think when I'm at my desk there's always this nagging feeling telling me I could be doing something more productive (code, music, learning) whereas on the sofa with a console I don't feel that.
If I remember rightly Google bought the data when they shutdown and incorporated it into Google Groups.
reply