@3dgoosee i think i went to google and asked question.

@whimsical sweet sleepii time-time :)

@whimsical yes we speak empire on which the sun never sets instead that true. but need no translation, feel 100%

also why is rick sanchez looking at memes with elon

@whimsical maybe you need mystical cure for ills https://youtube.com/watch/...

@whimsical reakky

libranka cast black magic on retoori

its super effective~

@whimsical my wife was a chemistry major. she grew psilocybin in a trash bag.

does that answer your question?

@whimsical "Sources claimed that a home video of gay pornography showed Wright having unprotected sex with homeless men he allegedly paid. The director of the video reportedly told the National Enquirer that Wright was aware he was being filmed."

reads like poetry.

id say they were temporarily home-*given* as part of the deal adn then re-homelessed after the deed was done. or not. we dont know. what if alf was real? is there a melmac? can elon take us there? so many quests.

lmao at the rerun of this most gloriously pointless of debates

all code is unreadable by default; comments go brrrrrrrrr

@12bitfloat correction you can have C or you can have *sanity* :)

lmao just draw the UI in opengl, like a MAN.

thats what i did it looks like shit <<<<<<<<

@whimsical @Lensflare nenes shhhhh, los argentos estan hablando.

@c3r38r170 No, no es de Provincias Unidas.

Un toque mas en serio, el punto no es tanto a quien vote (un chabon que no lo juna ni la madre), sino que lo hice sabiendo que ni en pedo iba a ganar una banca. Lo eescuche al flaco este hablar, y aparte de caerme bien, su discurso era *bastante* mas que tan solo "loco hay que frenar a Milei". Onda, no soy oficialista tampoco, pero que facil ser oposicion y punto, eh. Casi nadie tuvo una propuesta concreta esta eleccion, yo ni en pedo uso mi deber civico para bancar esa cagada. Si la oposicion quiere concentrar votos, que se pongan las pilas.

En fin, a esta altura del partido yo honestamente creo que igual nos van a romper el orto gane quien gane. En el corto plazo el dolar no se fue a la mierda y parece que __por ahora__ no nos vamos a comer otra devaluacion, asi que "bien". Ponele.

*deuda externa intensifies*

did you know cats love lasagna

@c3r38r170 ok te tiro una pista. no es K, tampoco es del Pro, ni radical, ni de LLA, ni del FIT, y tampoco es comunista. uuuuh quien podra ser? todo lo que sabemos de el es que es, sin lugar a dudas, un carpincho.

@c3r38r170 el candidato misterioso!

actually should go to random but fuck teh policie~

need turbo assembler.

No idea about the timeframe, but it was relatively easy due to my brain immediately spotting the parallels with Perl, which I was already fairly good at.

So how long did it take me to become a journeyman in devilspeak? I think it was somewhere around five or so months doing some 4-6 hours every other day, then maybe 2 years to get to this point, where reality is only a suggestion.

But this, in turn, was done after I already knew C, which would be fair to say took me 5 years to get *good*, something like I started at 16 and by the time I was 21 I actually knew what the fuck I was doing. But part of the reason this took me so long was because I used to do like two hours a day tops then dump all my time into Skyrim, so draw your own conclusions.

Anyway, unless you're programming like a fucking compsci major, javascript is actually alright.

Yup.

Most of the C++ stuff I use is miscellaneous utils like min, max, clamp, abs, swap, that kind of shit, then maybe there's constexpr and auto here and there. I tried to do more "idiomatic" style some years back, but it's just dull, so I dropped it.

The strength of pure C is that you can have a much more simplified mental model of what the fuck is going on. Also you can more easily see the assembly through your mind's eye if you commune with evil spirits. I think C++ can and should be just *that*, with quality of life features, so I get to be lazy.

Ultimately it boils down to two competing philosophies on how to achieve abstraction: writing more code versus adding language features. The latter, I think, has most definitely lost.

hardcore. stenographic erection.

Holdup, wasn't this what quantum computers were for? I am simultaneously astonished and impassive.

@Liebranca ACKSHUALLY, my bad:

push out->child,[cpy $_ for self->child];

should be

out->child=[cpy $_ for self->child];

fucking 5-minute edit limit. okay bye-bye.

Everything should be efficient, you say?

Hmm. Here's sort of riddle: what is the cheapest way to perform a deep copy for an average parse tree? Recursive or iterative?

recursive:

out=cpy self;

push out->child,[cpy $_ for self->child];

Now, try to solve iterative in your head :)

Unless you are dealing with a stupidly large fucker of a tree, the added cost and complexity may very well surpass that of recursion, and when it doesn't, the difference is typically negligible.

Essentially, the optimal approach is dictated by structures and the transformations applied, not coding style.

But back to your question: I prefer modifying in-place, but I will first think about how *cleanly* I can do so. Much more logic and variables may very well make the cost -- either in terms of memory or processing -- comparatively the same to duplication, in which case there might as well be no benefit.

The trick is doing less, just not strictly on the human side of the equation.

the plot thickens.

actually no i made it the fuck up

@AlgoRythm Absolutely. The meat of the argument is that we were already at a point where those genuine bits were already fairly obscure, and so the slopstorm only really serves to accelerate this; it's not a *new* problem per se but a serious aggravation of an existing one.

Essentially, it's an optimistic take: that if every mainstream space is to be irrevocably flooded by bland garbage, algorithmically generated or not, then what little remains authentic may thrive on a more intimate dimention, as opposed to the situation becoming exponentially worse ad infinitum until there's no humanity left.

I am inclined to agree with the optimism in this case simply because "human" (and whichever quasi-transcendental quality we ascribe to it) is still very much what people are actually looking for both in art and on a social context. I do not see evidence of this having changed at all, for if it had, discussions like this wouldn't be happening to begin with.

I've seen people make a similar argument regarding things like writing, music, visual art, et cetera.

It goes a bit like this: there already was a staggering number of human-made, yet soul-less, mass-produced content [*] that's virtually indistinguishable from AI slop; stuff to which there isn't truly a point to beyond gathering attention for a purely monetary purpose.

That is done for. But it's not the end of artistic expression any more than it is the end of socializing. The business model is dead, that's all, but the reason for which said model was ever established in the first place -- a human need -- has not disappeared, and will never do.

We are essentially starved for authenticity. So we'll go back to that, as we should've done over a decade ago when all of this started. Well, better late than never.

[*]: Addendum, referring to __art__ through insipid terms such as "content" is very much the epitome of enshittification.

@D-4got10-01 STAY A WHILE AND LISTEN

@retoor sorry but i am become the policia. you is retoori under arrest now.

you ++'d your own rant didntcha.

*checks whimsicals profile*

yes you did. once at least.

that's illegul.-~