A plaintiff won a judgment. He asked the judge: “what do I do now?” The judge replied: “well, if you’re reading the paper one day and see ‘defendant wins the Powerball,’ then you know exactly what to do.”
This sounds like the "can't squeeze blood from a stone" principle. If they don't have anything, you can't get it from them. But if they do have something and just won't give it to you, there are other ways to escalate.
Noncompliance with a court order is one of the worst situations to be in, because a court can order almost anything to coerce compliance, including getting your bank to just send the money to the plaintiff, freezing your bank accounts, sending a sheriff to take your assets, or putting you in jail for an unlimited time until you comply - this last one often happens when cryptocurrency is involved so the court can't actually seize it. They'll just jail you until you give it up. I think the longest contempt of court time was 20ish years.
I've heard of people putting a lien on stuff like the employee's desks and chairs and then they surprise pikachu when the sheriff shows up and the assholes that didn't pay it have nowhere to sit. No idea if it's true, but it was convincing.
The thing is, everyone can't have 4 empty seats to drive to work in New York City. There's only so much space on the streets and in the bridges and tunnels, and now there's a congestion charge on top of that.
Now I only buy USB cables if they are marked with their speed and wattage. If it’s not marked, I have to assume it carries little power and is glacially slow, which is fine to charge some Bluetooth headphones but is not usable to connect an SSD.
The bees live alone and do not seem to socialize in any way, so this is not a “network” or “city”. The study says “aggregation” which is more appropriate.
This is how Texinfo (which this uses) works. It's the same if you navigate it with an Info reader: "n" goes to the "next" node, which behaves as you point out.
When I'm reading in an Info reader (almost always in GNU Emacs) I always hit the spacebar when reading. This scrolls down a page and, if it's at the end of a page and, if at the bottom, goes to the next subnode - in other words, what "makes sense." (Actually the binding for this is "Info-scroll-up".)
That doesn't help when you're on a website, but for me Texinfo websites have a distinctive look and when I see them, I immediately know what clicking "Next" will do, and I know to instead go to the bottom of the page and go to the subnodes if that's what I want, which it typically is.
I agree that it's weird...but maybe understanding the overall weirdness of Texinfo helps it all make sense?? A more coherent weirdness?
I just looked in my Backblaze restore program, and all my .git folders are in there. I did have to go to the Settings menu and toggle an option to show hidden files. This is the Mac version.
(Arq developer here) By default Arq tries to be unobtrusive. Edit your backup plan and slide the “CPU usage” slider all the way to the right to make it go faster.
Meet macOS System Integrity Protection. Even root can’t do some things. Some hate it, I love it and would never turn it off. I know some parts of my system haven’t been gunked up by random vendors.
These customers own expensive cars - or at least, cars that were expensive when they were new. The car might now be ten years old or more, and the owner bought it used. They want a prestige marque, but the customer does not have the money to buy a new prestige car. So they are looking to save on service.
All the time I see cars with expensive names - BMW, Mercedes Benz - broken down on the side of the road, while old Hondas and Toyotas keep cruising by. Those are the customers for this shop: they spent all their money buying an expensive used car, and now they can't afford to maintain it and fix looming problems; meanwhile the Toyota or Hyundai driver gets maintenance and maybe even takes it to the dealer for it.
A mechanic like this can't afford to hire someone to answer the phone. Such a person is expensive, and these customers want rock-bottom prices despite the car being expensive. So a chatbot is good enough and better than nothing.
The most trustworthy mechanic I used in England had an appointment book pretty much full for four months in advance. He didn't answer the phone, didn't have a computer, just a desk diary. If you wanted him to work on your car you turned up at his workshop and spoke to him. If you were willing to wait until he'd finished whatever thing he was doing he'd take a quick look at your car and suggest a course of action. And despite his full order book if something looked urgent enough and small enough he'd fit you in quite quickly.
He charged reasonable prices, but definitely not rock bottom. He had no need to compete with the bottom feeders because every customer acted as his public relations agent.
Ok, presume it is. Why is this a useful observation? The author still needed to poke and prod the LLM to produce useful information. She still needed to know what questions to ask and prompts to give, and hopefully steered it right when it made up falsehoods.
I’ve used CL for years and the layered model fits with my experience yet I never conceived of it exactly that way. It’s useful. So what if an LLM wrote it?
If it helps, the article “evolved” so I don’t really care that LLM’s had a part to play. I am setting up a development environment for Mezzano, the Common Lisp OS after getting it running on ARM64. I needed to understand the full CL toolchain to build an AI agent harness that could talk to Mezzano.
I figured out I could do this via SWANK. But kept hitting the same problem, the information about how all the pieces fit together is scattered across dozens of sources and nobody as far as I can tell had put a complete layered map in one place. Which I kind of already had from all the conversations and research I’ve been doing so I glommed it all together and posted it to r/lisp.
BTW the lisp community have been really helpful so I incorporated and continue to add all the corrections and pointers people have been giving. Case in point someone above pointed out vend which is an interesting approach that might be useful for my lisp harness project.
When I read an article, I am expecting to read the author's own experiences and insights they gained from them. Not the regurgitation of an industrial scale word generator.
> She still needed to know what questions to ask and prompts to give
Then publish the prompts. Let me enter them in an LLM of my choosing and see what bullshit it hallucinates and diff it against the 'article'.
> hopefully steered it right when it made up falsehoods.
"Hopefully"? Publishing something a stochastic parrot dreamed up under your name is ghost writing at best and spreading misinformation at worst.
The "insight" that I needed a map, and that I had effectively created a map from my research, reading and "prompting" was mine, but I have no problem with using fancy tooling to help me pull it all together.
If someone could've pointed me to some other fully laid out mapping of the CL tooling stack I would've been happy as the article was a rather time consuming side quest.
With more time and energy, human discovery and invention, the statistical mechanics backing the information digest will improve beyond any one human's lifetime internalization and idiosyncratic writings divined.
Author here. Deeply interested but not an expert by any means happy to have saved anyone a few tokens. I have done my best to fact check the content and the people on r/lisp have contributed a ton of corrections that I incorporated into revised edits. Always welcome constructive inputs if you have spotted any mistakes let me know.
Hi well you see it doesn’t matter how many times you will repeat „I am not an expert I did it for myself and just sharing in case someone else would be interested”.
Assholes will come out of woodwork claiming only experts are allowed to post anything online.
My point is, stop being apologetic as it only eats your energy and DGAF about such comments as the top one I replied to.
Thank you! Point taken and appreciated. Time is better spent on producing better materials. I have made a short version of the post as the primary article being too long was a valid criticism.
A plaintiff won a judgment. He asked the judge: “what do I do now?” The judge replied: “well, if you’re reading the paper one day and see ‘defendant wins the Powerball,’ then you know exactly what to do.”
reply