Details
-
AboutChief Procrastination Officer, Keeper of The Keys to My Father's Flat, proud holder of a mediocre BSc. Analytical fundamentalist Manufactured: Budapest, 2001 Calories: 70,000 May contain traces of other viewpoints Matrix: @lbfalvy.matrix.org
-
SkillsTypescript, C#, Rust, Orchid, goofy altlangs, group theory
-
LocationBudapest, HU
-
Website
-
Github
Joined devRant on 5/18/2018
Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
![](/static/devrant/img/pipeless-devrant-banner-white.png)
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
-
Google Maps: Hey you are at restaurant XYZ! You wanna see the menu?
Me: Yeah, why would I want to see the worse edition of the menu on maps! If only I could just move my eyeballs slightly...2 -
Have you ever started a new job and they have a bunch of legacy and technical debt so much that it doesn’t even makes sense trying to fix anything4
-
Amusing vim/neovim newbie beatdown story. I am mostly enjoying it, so please don't take it too personally, as I'm 60% having fun, 30% looking for help, and only 10% attacking your fundamental identity and way of life
#1 uses left and right arrows to move the selection up and down, and down and up arrows to move the selection into and out of tree elements
#2 uses tab and shift tab to move the selection up and down, but has great filtering
#3 uses up and down arrows to move the selection up and down, and enter and esc to move the selection into and out of tree elements.
I get that I have just frantically cobbled various things together to make it work but man, there's something to be said about the I in IDE...10 -
At my new job I'm allowed to goof around more while at the same time less. Im no longer limited to tech and can just choose the best tool for the job and fuck around trying out new interesting stuff that might work. But at the same time IF I FUCK UP, you will definetly read about it in the news!12
-
Have you ever applied for a job and then spiraled after a few days of not hearing anything back?
Me too! 🙄😭😭😭14 -
I am SOOOO tired of outdated, easily circumvented, methods of attempting to find rule breaking culprits...
especially when they can't even come up with anything more specific than 'suspecting' "unusual activity".17 -
Here is my idea for a time machine which can only send one bit of information back in time.
@Wisecrack has asked me about it and I didn’t want to write it in comments because of the character limit.
So here we go.
The DCQE (delayed-choice quantum eraser) is an experiment that has been successfully performed by many people in small scale.
You can read about it on wikipedia but I'll try to explain it here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
First I need to quickly explain the double slit experiment because DCQE is based on that.
The double slit experiment shows that a particle, like a photon, seems to go through both slits at the same time and interfere with itself as a wave to finally contribute to an interference pattern when hit on a screen. Many photons will result in a visible interference pattern.
However, if we install a detector somewhere between the particle emitter an the screen, so that we know which path the particle must have taken (which slit it has passed through), then there will be no interference pattern on the screen because the particle will not behave as a wave.
For the time machine, we will interpret the interference pattern as bit 1 and no interference pattern as bit 0.
Now the DCQE:
This device lets us choose if we know the path of the particle or if we want wo erase this knowledge. And we can make this decision after the particle hit the screen (that is the "delayed" part), with the help of quantum entanglement.
How does it work?
Each particle send out by the emitter will pass through a crystal which will split it into an entangled pair of particles. This pair shares the same quantum state in space and time. If we know the path of one of the particle "halves", we also know the path of the other one. Remember the knowledge about the path determines if we will see the interference pattern. Now one of the particle "halves" goes directly into the screen by a short path. The other one takes a longer path.
The longer path has a switch that we can operate (this is the "choice" part). The switch changes the path that the particle takes so that it either goes through a detector or it doesn't, determining if it will contribute to the intererence pattern on the screen or not. And this choice will be done for the short path particle-half because their are entangeld.
The path of the first half particle is short, so it will hit the screen earlier.
After that happened, we still have time to make the choice for the second half, since its path is longer. But making the choice also affects the first half, which has already hit the screen. So we can retroactively change what we will see (or have seen) on the screen.
Remember this has already been tested and verified. It works.
The time machine:
We need enough photons to distinguish the patterns on the screen for one single bit of information.
And the insanely difficult part is to make the path for the second half long enough to have something practical.
Also, those photons need to stay coherent during their journey on that path and are not allowed to interact with each other.
We could use two mirrors, to let the photons bounce between them to extend the path (or the travel duration), but those need to be insanely pricise for reasonable amounts of time.
Just as an example, for 1 second of time travel, we would need a path length about the distance of the moon to the earth. And 1 second isn't very practical. To win the lottery we would need at least many hours.
Also, we would need to build the whole thing multiple times, one for each bit of information.
How to operate the time machine:
Turn on the particle emitter and look at the screen. If you see an interference pattern, write down a 1, otherwise a 0.
This is the information that your future you has sent you.
Repeat this process with the other time machines for more bits of information.
Then wait the time which corresponds to the path length (maybe send in your lottery numbers) and then (this part is very important) make sure to flip the switch corresponsing to the bit that you wrote down, so that your past you receives that info in the past.
I hope that helps :)9 -
I was curious about the geographical distribution of Top Tech Jobs (i.e. how many FAANG jobs are in Europe, where they are mostly focused, etc)... So I came up with a draft (prototype) of the Tech Jobs Radar:
https://jobs-radar.com/
I'm sharing it here just in case someone else is curious about analyzing such data7 -
"You're a real programmer only when you first encounter a segfault"
I had the most demotivating segfault in my life. Every functions in my project returns a segfault, except the one to init and create a window. I/O. Audio. Frame Buffers. Everything. AAAH.
It is on glX (X11) so i'm planning to remove it's support and instead work on WASM then use Electron to render those apps on X11 and rpi.16 -
Procastinator's tricks to be productive: Schedule messages
I hate to write people. They could answer. My whole plan might be thrown off. But when is the best time to answer them? The day after tomorrow? Too late. Tomorrow. Around 10? Thank you to all messengers that allow me to schedule a message. Instead of procrastinating, I answer, I schedule, and if I am in a bad mood, I later come back and abort and rewrite the message nicer.
Went perfectly swimmingly with my happy new year messages. Everyone got them at 00:00. Yes my friend, you're obviously the most important thing in my life, first thing I did was writing you!3 -
Bulgaria and Romania are now part of the schengen area, maybe I should buy myself a gypsy wife as my way outta third world 🤔12
-
you ever habituate yourself to reflexively do something and then forget you ever did that and don't even notice you're doing it therefore can't turn it off because you're too oblivious to understand the problem
and for amusement what is it?8 -
Working on creating an asyncio UDP server/client. Going to have it talk to another server/client. Why? Because I don't want there to be a round trip to my data. I want send and forget.
So I created a combo server/client in C++. I am testing out the client and I find that it connects and sends data with zero errors as a client even if there is no endpoint (server) active. Okay, well its connection-less so it kinda makes sense. So I am not even sure what connection means at this point. I figured it was sending data into the ether. Fine, I don't have to worry about dropped endpoints or some shit. The server does see messages once it creates itself (tested with Python server). Not old messages, just the ones currently being sent.
So I do the same thing in Python and use asyncio to create server/client with opposite ports to talk to my C++ server/client. However, if C++ server doesn't exist the Python client throws an error. Okay, wtf... So Python UDP client is gonna be extra steps because why? Because fuck you! That's why! lol
UDP Client Comparison:
C++: I don't give a shit, if you don't get the data then fuck off. I won't error no matter what.
Python: Oh shit, there is no server, so I won't even run. Because fuck you and wanting to send messages to the ether.
Now I need to do the same thing in C# and see what kind of "fuck you's" it will have.
What did I learn? I learned Python has a nice asyncio system similar to asio from boost.11 -
*Reading a bug report's summary*
'Object x is displayed incorrectly when playing on PC in resolution 1024x768 or Android tablets w/ 4:3 Aspect Ratio'
*facepalms*
You, sir, are failing at basic math && basic logic, among other things.
1024x768 _has_ an Aspect Ratio of 4:3.
If only you had bothered checking, you would've know that the issue is purely related to the Aspect Ratio && !just that one resolution.7 -
I'm delirious so here's your daily dose of fuck:
```fasm
; --- * --- * ---
; 64-bit byte-by-byte mash
macro clamp_u8 {
mov cl,$08;
mov rdx,rax;
rept 8 \{
rol rdx,cl;
xor al,dl;
\};
};
; --- * --- * ---
; give 8-bit random seed
macro prng_u8 {
rdtsc;
shl rdx,32;
or rax,rdx;
clamp_u8;
};
; --- * --- * ---
; roll dice
d20: prng_u8;
; x%20, according to gcc ;>
mov edi,eax;
mov eax,-51;
mul dil;
shr ax,12;
lea eax,[rax+rax*4];
lea edx,[0+rax*4];
mov eax,edi;
sub eax,edx;
; discard high and give
and rax,$FF;
ret;
```
I guess `d20` could be inlined too but I thought it'd be too much.
Is it faster than straight C? Probably not. But it's way lighter, so it loads faster. Below five hundred bytes mother fucker.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'll go sit in the darkness repeteadly typing roll 1d20 on the terminal. For reasons.9 -
Figure I can simplify the code if I have the compiler handle *some* of the register allocation.
Eh? What do you mean "NP-hard"? Dafuq's an ENN-PEE?
**frantically reads wiki**
I can proudly say that I understood absolutely nothing; CS stands for cocksucker or rather abysmal failure at the most basic forms of communication, I don't just sit here all day expecting you to flawlessly prove my point with every swallow of breath you draw, yet here we are.
Perhaps one factor involved in producing the generalized cluelessness of my colleagues, I mean their "imposter s*ndrome", has a bit to do with how fucking thick you've formulated this glorified bollocks you call theory. Were not for your incompetence, arcane crackheads like me would simply __not__ be capable of rising to the top of this field entirely via determination and a big salami, therefore I owe you both a debt of gratitude as well as every last word and sign of total disrespect.
As interesting as the study of computational complexity can be, if done correctly that is, you idiots are stuck in a mathematician's abstract mindset in a field entirely devoted to application of ideas rather than *just* the ideas themselves.
To answer my own question, it means there's no known efficient solution. That's it. The part about nondeterministic polynomial convolution of an irreductible rectosigmoid junction can apparently be skipped altogether. Anyway, I solved the problem with the computational equivalent of pizza sticks while you were out in the field mentally jacking off to λ.
Lecture is over, now go clean up the ethereal masturbatory residue if you will, I have mystical el Khwarizmi type-shit to solve via further clubbing of abstraction through liverwurst bologna of immense proportions. ^D3 -
It's not the "age of AI" you dissecated nutsack munching buffoon, you could lick and suckle my delicious tits with that grandiose old tongue you have, if only it wasn't so profoundly infected with feces of every consistency and color.
Your word, for the two shits it's worth, is still better spent elsewhere than promoting falsehood, giving importance to that which has none, or spreading the belief that a demonstrably unscalable approach still has, somehow, room to grow. It's no fucking s*ndrome but full on imp*sterhood, truly a grand fellowship of pauseless jackoffs.
This is it -- a glorified, disobedient, largely unpredictable autocomplete. A probabilistic bullshit machine. It wouldn't be able to replace you, if only you weren't so fucking stupid.
And yes, I *am* contradicting myself by addressing the incredibly cost inefficient overclocked melting minerstack in the room, but I can hardly make the point without doing it, so shush.
Back to the stone age with this shit. Now pass the fucking joint.1 -
So, I applied for a job. People tend *not* to answer my applications, probably because my resume very clearly states I implemented malloc in fasm, among other things.
I imagine them going like "Sir, this is a Wendy's", or rather "we're looking for a 10X rockstar AnalScript ZAZQUACH mongoose-deus puffery quarter-stack developer". Fair enough, I certainly don't fit that bill.
But this time I not only got an answer, the guy went like "I'm impressed". Is this... recognition? From a human? What?
Fellas, I cannot process this emotion. Being frank, it's not even about the job. But willfully going against the idiocy of the industry standard, and then seeing that utterly deranged move actually amounting to something -- no matter how small -- is quite uncanny.
And of fucking course, it's a Perl job. Figures. Great minds think alike.3