From your own selected sources, we have Kissinger telling Nixon that the Air Force isn’t designed for this, but has to relay Nixon’s orders to General Haig.
This is a good point. If you think about it Kissinger was just an intern that passed notes back and forth. As a man with zero influence in any real outcomes he should be remembered for his ability to take dictation with aplomb. It is a mystery to scholars why he is regarded as anything at all
This was exactly my undergrad research topic! My knowledge is a bit out of date (perhaps this is in TFA), but the running theory is that there are two number systems. The first operates noiselessly and immediately for numbers under 4. The second works in the exact way you are describing, where the magnitude of errors are linear in the size of the set (the “analog magnitude” system). As I recall, there is substantial evidence supporting the idea of two separate systems rather than one.
I don’t really follow your point about integers. We know the brain does object detection at a low level, so it makes sense that the number systems will operate over countable elements.
I was watching a NOVA episode about the human mind recently, and in the episode they were showing that the eyes only have a very limited 'high bandwidth' optical viewing area. Anything outside of this high bandwidth area has to be committed to memory. I wonder if anyone has researched if that corresponds with our ability to count.
This is spot on. I have two close relatives in their early 60s who lost their jobs during the pandemic. One has diabetes, and searched for months before finding a tenuous low-level position for the insurance
Right, and single thread performance won’t matter as much if it becomes easier to implement multithreading. This hurts legacy code, but I imagine it would be worth it in the long run.
It would remain as hard as it has always been. Also threads are very heavy, locking kills performance, and if you don't have GIL, you'll need to manage explicit locks, that will be just as slow but also cause an incredible amount of subtle bugs.
> if you don't have GIL, you'll need to manage explicit locks
You need to do that with multithreaded Python code with the GIL. The GIL only guarantees that operations that take a single bytecode are thread-safe. But many common operations (including built-in operators, functions, and methods on built-in types) take more than one bytecode.
> locking kills performance, and if you don't have GIL, you'll need to manage explicit locks
I was under the impression that the Python thread scheduler is dependent on the host OS (rather than being intelligent enough to magically schedule away race conditions, deadlocks, etc.), so you still need to manage locks, semaphores, etc. if you write multi-threaded Python code. I don't see how removing the GIL would make this any worse. (Maybe make it slightly harder to debug, but at that point it would be in-line with debugging multi-threaded Java/C/etc. code.)
Or would this affect single-threaded code somehow?
In python you always have a lock, the GIL. If you take it away you end up actually having to do synchronization for real. Which is hard and error prone.
I absolutely see the use case, and I believe AR is already being tested in some heavy industry sectors (eg oilfield services). That said, it’s not really in Apple’s wheelhouse as a primarily consumer tech company.
Not directly relevant, but I’m realizing the relative ubiquity of Apple Stores are a competitive advantage. I assume you can test an Oculus headset at the occasional Best Buy, but I suspect the experience isn’t as polished
In this particular case that doesn't matter, because the only time you run Python is for a one-off conversion against the model files.
That takes at most a minute to run, but once converted you'll never need to run it again. Actual llama.cpp model inference uses compiled C++ code with no Python involved at all.
I think that if OP finds The Matrix too adult, Ex Machina is even less appropriate.
Her is a good recommendation but I struggle to imagine a 12 year old identifying well with alienated-middle-aged-man-malaise ;) (although I loved Lost in Translation at 14 or so)
Arrival is a great recommendation. I had some quibbles with its science, but it’s good Sci Fi. Then he can introduce him to Ted Chiang’s other writing
Ex Machina has some nudity, but less gun violence? It’s a lot more idea driven than action/violence driven (matrix). And the themes are different. Depends on what people culturally mean as adult I suppose.
I admittedly don't have kids, but media is so saturated and oversexualized that I personally feel that thought-provoking fiction that dissects and critiques urges is possible and good to explore at some point, in safe company, ammended with brief discussion. I'm certainly thankful I got offered these conversations.
That said, Ex Machina might be a little intense in that regard, even though I seem to remember that the explicity is mostly some nudity. It's a great movie, but probably not the first or fifth I would show a 12-year-old with the above discursive parameters included. The themes of corruption and "fucking around and finding out" are so heavy that you don't want to just leave a child with it.
It could be your tenth pick, though, or perhaps something for 6-18 months on of successfully watching and discussing movies and their depiction of life in an open way.
In its defense, I saw The Matrix at 12 or 13 and adored it because I felt like it was something more serious—-that I could appreciate it was a sign I was maturing, and I was grateful for that
Of course all kids are different. I always loved the Back to The Future movies from a young age. Moon is also harder fare while being less violent than The Matrix.
You might also enjoy watching the modern Doctor Who together? Or Star Trek?
As for more books, maybe introduce him to Hitchhikers Guide?
[1] https://gsp.yale.edu/sites/default/files/walrus_cambodiabomb...
[2] https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB123/3%20%20Kissinger...