I think it's a really cool homage, but that the site could be a little clearer that it's not Fabien's work. When I first clicked through and saw a different name, I was hopeful that someone had started a publishing house dedicated to high-quality dissections of classic games.
> If you are a non-resident business and you sell goods into Australia with a customs value of A$1,000 or less, GST applies and you will have to collect this from your customer and send the GST to us.
I am not very familiar with Go and especially not its generics support. Can you implement the "join" version instead of the "bind" version, where you turn a T[T[a]] into a T[a]?
My experience has been the exact opposite. Python seems to churn its packaging and tooling at an astonishing rate, whereas Rails forced a centralisation of its ecosystem.
I am a secondary math teacher and I do exactly this with my students.
When working on retrieving the expression of an affine function, I tell them about Shamir'..., they choose a secret pin as the slope, generate two points, give them to two other students who have to pair together to find the pin again. The students are always very engaged.
I'm so glad it works. If you handwave at the generalisation to quadratics and higher polynomials, do the students follow it well? I assume you don't get into the finite field stuff, but it seems like it'd be cool to handwave at "there's actually other structures where most of this polynomial stuff works, even in somewhat weird ways".
I did originally, when it collected a bunch of obscure knowledge and made it searchable and useful. It was fun and rewarding to put things you knew into the common knowledge pool, and everyone celebrated a successful competitor to Experts Exchange. The SO model had a few major flaws that became impossible to ignore after it was entrenched. First, the reward scheme rewards the exact opposite of what it should incentivise: common questions are hit by many users and therefore attract lots of upvotes while answering the really hard stuff often meant you didn't even get your answer marked as "accepted" (because the OP had given up and stopped checking the site). Second, the site deliberately cultivated an "editor caste" in the Wikipedia style before the failure modes of that model were well-known: well-intentioned newbies get shut down by miserable yet untouchable people who play (and sometimes help write) the site's rules. Third, the stated desire to identify canonical answers to questions had no clear way to handle the evolution of the software people were talking about. So you'd have highly upvoted answers that might have been referencing deprecated libraries, and it was very hard for the newer answer to gain traction via either internal or external search.
It was also unfortunately before the retro boom of the 2020s, so questions about older arcana were often vulnerable to being closed instead of answered.
GNU Taler[1] is an interesting middle-ground in the payments space: privacy-preserving for consumers, non-blockchain digital cash, and keeps merchant activity taxable.
I do worry about their whitepaper recommending it for a CBDC[2] (linked from [3]) which points out the state can implement negative interest rates, and that its architecture requires the issuer to get involved even in "spot your friend a $20"-level use cases. Since the issuer would presumably be required to KYC everyone, that also creates a big surveillance problem.
> I am pretty certain that the credit card fees (that is passed on to the merchant) does not come close to the value that I gain for my credit card loyalty.
Generally it's the interchange fees that fund reward programs (charged between banks), not the merchant fee.
It generally depends on the contract the merchant has with payment provider:
- some have relatively high merchant fees to cover for interchange fees
- others (generally called IC+) have the merchant pay the IC fee plus some other (generally much smaller) fee to the payment provider
In both cases it's the merchant that ends up paying them. It's not a concidence that in Europe (where there are caps to IC fees) the fees that merchants pay are generally lower.
I would have loved to read the version of the article that dove deeper and was not touched by LLM, even if it meant less clear English from the (presumably Korean) author.
It’s not just “touched by the LLM” — it’s literally transformed. /s
I have the same feeling, I skipped reading any paragraph that starts with “not X, Y”.
It’s possible the author has so little proficiency in English that without LLMs they would be hardly intelligible. Unfortunately I developed an allergic reaction to LLM-generated texts…
reply