Without web search:

Chat V3 discusses the events: violent government crackdown, human rights violations, censoring.

R1 evades answering, stating the topic is sensitive in China (simlar how it reacts to American sensitive topics)

With web search enabled, R1 discusses the found sources (which are not censored, and the model does not add any censoring as far as I can tell, certainly not enough to respect the Chinese governments stance.)

People being able to adapt their software to their own needs by making changes to the code is exactly what open source is about. This is good.

What is a problem though, is to have the code merged in the main repository requires you to gift them the rights to your code (not just license it). They are also not very clear about this in the summary of their CLA: “You're giving Zed permission to use and share your contributions (like original works or modifications).” which could be misunderstood to just be a usual open source licensing agreement, but seems to be complete handover of copyright: https://zed.dev/cla

This is not good, and something people should be more aware of when contributing.

For me, the small contrast on pages like HN (in particular with any of the gray text) strains my eyes because it’s more effort for me to see the letters.

But I also read a reasonable amount of PDFs (black on white) which is relatively comfortable on most of my monitors (LCDs with generally low brightness setting to have less light shine into my eyes).

I think what I am saying is, I agree that what is comfortable depends on the user, so websites not moving off the defaults is better, because then users can configure what works for them.

Addendum: The low contrast example on the article is very uncomfortable to read for me.

The jo part is close to German though, so maybe this is why it’s not too bad for someone who knows English and German. And everyone else gets to dislike at least some part of it :-)

I assume your argument is: “Everyone who had to learn English as a second language is so used to completely random pronunciation that they won’t complain about anything anymore”.

It’s great if this separation works for you and your current setup, but what does prevent future you from building muscle memory to quickly switch back to porn when you want to procrastinate your taxes?

I am aware that a lot of people use searches as a form of navigation, but it’s also very common that people use bookmarks, speed dial, history, pinned tabs, and other browser features instead of searching. My Firefox is configured to not do online searches when I type into the address bar, instead I get only history suggestions. This setup allows for quick navigation, and does not require any steps to set up new pages that I need to visit.

What I want to say that while you seem to imply that you found a different pattern of use that many people will soon migrate to, I think these patterns have always been popular. People discover and make use of them as needed.

It’s also strange that you put such a negative sentiment on interconnected documents. Do you not realize how important these connections were for you to be able to reach the point you are at now? How else would you have found the things that are useful to you? By watching ads?

Search engines are also … really not really a good example of the strengths of the interconnected web, as they are mostly a one way thing. Consider instead a Hacker News discussion about a blog, and some other blog linking to that discussion, creating these interconnected but still separate communities and documents.

Choosing space for a very common thing in your language often makes sense, as you reduce the amount of visual elements. Thus space is often used to apply arguments to functions. Lisp and Haskell are common examples Though, you could argue that in Lisp it only is an application if it is within parenthesis.

If so, I fully agree, on the config being less powerful.

Maybe let me add to my original argument, because it does not seem to make it’s point well.

I think that it would be feasible (and worthwhile) to simplify the configuration structure while keeping Guile syntax, and have the complaint be a non issue. As opposed to keeping the semantic structure and just changing the syntax as the comment I replied to proposed.

Giving Meta exclusive access to those copies is the problem (which is effectively what we are doing if they are not prosecuted, or, alternatively, if we accepted that LibGen is fair use for everyone).

The systemd variant uses one of the universal DSLs for key-value pairs (key=value) and the universal DSL for calling programs (program name, space separated list of arguments).

The latter is even the same syntax that lisp uses for functions calls – thus I would argue the systemd config file looks more like a lisp program than the Guix version does.

As a person that has seen a reasonable amount of sexpression, this is what I would not bat an eye at:

(start /path/to/ntpd -n -c /etc/ntpd.conf -u ntpd -g)

The whole FP vs OOP distinction does make little sense these days, as it has mostly been shown that each concept from the one can neatly fit within the other and vice versa.

If you don’t have enough time, write down whatever pieces you understood, and write down what parts “seem to work, but you don’t understand“ to help make progress towards better documentation.

If you put the documentation as comments into the file, this can make copy&pasting working examples into a reasonably solid process.

My understanding is that this was the same for Apple until they added e2e encrypted backups, but Apple users seem much less sensitive to privacy violations done by Apple (which is probably reasonable given that Apple is not as focused on profiting off of data)