Every time I read things like this, it makes me think that AI was trained off of me. Using semicolons, utilizing classic writing patterns, and common use of compare and contrast are all examples of how they teach to write essays in high school and college. They're also all examples of how I think and have learned to communicate.

I'm not sure what to make of that either.

To be explicit, it’s not general hallmarks of good writing. It’s exactly two common constructions: not X but Y, and 3 items in parallel. These two pop up in extreme disproportion to normal “good writing”. Good writers know to save these tricks for when they really want to make a point.

Most people aren’t great writers, though (including myself). I’d guess that if people find the “not X but Y” compelling, they’ll overuse it. Overusing some stylistic element is such a normal writing “mistake”. Unless they’re an extremely good writer with lots of tools in their toolbox. But that’s not most people.

I find the probability that a particular writer latches onto the exact same patterns that AI latches onto, and does not latch onto any of the patterns AI does not latch onto, to be quite low. Is it a 100% smoking gun? No. But it’s suspicious.

Interesting, I'll have to look for those.

But you didn't write that "Using semicolons, utilizing classic writing patterns, and common use of compare and contrast are not just examples of how they teach to write essays in high school and college; they're also all examples of how I think and have learned to communicate."

I believe that's still true of Erlang, but Elixir has UTF-8 encoded strings. In practice the only time you need to use Erlang strings from Elixir is if you're using an Erlang API.

This looks amazing! I keep loving Phoenix more the more I use it.

I was curious what the pricing for this is? Is it normal fly pricing for an instance, and is there any AI cost or environment cost?

And can it do multiple projects on different domains?

It’s $20 per month if you click through, and I haven’t tried it but almost certainly the normal hosting costs will be added on top.

I've tried it, the $20 of included credits lasted me about 45 minutes

Thanks, apparently didn't click through enough

It's very possible they don't replace them, but many libraries also have legitimate sells to clear books from inventory to make room. Usually over like a week or three day weekend once or twice a year, the last day having bags of books for $5. All of them have stamps/card holders/stickers designating the library. So those don't necessarily mean they were borrowed and never returned.

You may be right, but I wonder why they would remainder a book that was on hold.

https://github.com/github/copilot.vim works pretty well for inline autocompletion

https://github.com/CopilotC-Nvim/CopilotChat.nvim is the best I've found for the chat-type interaction. It lets you choose models/etc.

It's still not quite as nice as cursor, but decent enough that I enjoy using them

Infinite, yes, but I would say it's not quite as core to the language as it is in Haskell where everything's lazy. Infinite streams are quite simple though:

  Stream.iterate(1, fn(x) -> x end) 
  |> Enum.take(5)
  [1, 1, 1, 1, 1]

How do you use that for lists that do not simply iterate, like

    ghci> fibs = 0 : 1 : zipWith (+) fibs (drop 1 fibs)
    ghci> take 10 fibs
    [0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34]
?

You can use Stream.unfold/2:

  Stream.unfold({0,1}, fn {a,b} -> {a,{b,a+b}} end)
  |> Enum.take(10)
  [0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34]

https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Fibonacci_sequence#Elixir

The functions don't return a mutable version of a variable or anything. You still get an immutable copy (it may not be an actual copy, I don't know the internals) of the state, and the state he's referencing in a Genserver is the current state of a running process that runs in a loop handling messages. For example in liveview, each connection (to an end-user) is a process that keeps state as part of the socket. And the editing is handled through events and lifecycle functions, not through directly mutating the state, so things tend to be more predictable in my experience. It's kind of like mutation by contract. In reality, it's more like for each mailbox message, you have another loop iteration, and that loop iteration can return the same value or a new value. The new values are always immutable. So it's like going from generations of variables, abandoning the old references, and using the new one for each iteration of the loop. In practice though, it's just message handling and internal state, which is what he means by "from the perspective of our program".

You typically wouldn't just write a Genserver to hold state just to make it mutable (though I've seen them used that way), unless it's shared state across multiple processes. They're not used as pervasively as say classes in OOP. Genservers usually have a purpose, like tracking users in a waiting room, chat messages, etc. Each message handler is also serial in that you handle one mailbox message at a time (which can spawn a new process, but then that new process state is also immutable), so the internal state of a Genserver is largely predictable and trackable. So the only way to mutate state is to send a message, and the only way to get the new state is to ask for it.

There's a lot of benefits of that model, like knowing that two pieces of code will never hit a race condition to edit the same area of memory at the same time because memory is never shared. Along with the preemptive scheduler, micro-threads, and process supervisors, it makes for a really nice scalable (if well-designed) asynchronous solution.

I'm not sure I 100% agree that watching mutating state requires a function to observe it. After all, a genserver can send a message to other processes to let them know that the state's changed along with the new state. Like in a pub-sub system. But maybe he's presenting an over-simplification trying to explain the means of mutability in Elixir.

`send` is a function. `receive` is a special form but in this context it counts as a function

Telescope feels so game-changing, and I've not found anything like it outside of Neovim and Emacs. Being able to fuzzy search a buffer or my project instantly makes navigation insanely fast.

People talk about not needing to type fast when coding, but I do need to navigate quickly, especially to not lose context while thinking. Ivy/Helm/Telescope with one of the various jump libraries (and LSP of course) makes code navigation feel second nature.

I mean every single editor has fuzzy file finding these days.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I disagree with the tooling comment. Composer is horrendously slow, taking on the order of multiple minutes just to do a update often times. This is just my experience, but I'd much rather take mix, cargo, or yarn any day.

xdebug, while it works, also feels antiquated. Trying to get it working in a new system or project can take quite a while. Again, compared to python or node's debugging experience or profiling experience, and it feels like something stuck out of the 90s.

Even just getting output from php is difficult for me. Maybe it's because of the webserver I'm using? But python, elixir, node, go, etc, all output logs to stdout while running a local service. Maybe that'd work with the built in webserver, but fpm or modphp, etc, it seems like you have to hunt down logs.

Not to mention that the dev servers almost always require a full apache or nginx setup just to function. Opposed to a node, elixir, python, or go server which all run directly from the directory you're in. (Including things like hot/auto reloading in node and elixir)

I'm not a full time php dev, but my time in php always feels like a grind, and just getting tooling working is not an easy thing. If I'm missing some state of the art alternatives, I'd love to hear them though.

composer 1 was slow, composer 2 (released 3 years ago) is fast

I'm on composer 2.5.8

My impression (which may be wrong) of Lemmy is that a large number of instances are very pro-censorship and heavily left-leaning. Which of course is reflective of Reddit itself. But it doesn't exactly instill confidence in signing up for instances as a relatively conservative contributor, even while abiding by the terms of service of the instances.

Any advice for a conservative Christian trying to find a reddit alternative or Lemmy instance that also doesn't want to be moderated or banned into oblivion (or de-federated because of trolls which I do not represent)? As many conservatives know, even joining /r/conservative and not posting on reddit was enough to entirely be banned from many communities that have nothing to do with politics. Walking into another similarly prejudiced social network (but at a platform level) doesn't sound like fun to me.

Why not join Truth Social, a or other dedicated conservative social network instead?

A few reasons:

1. I appreciate open and friendly discussion with people who don't think like me. The atmosphere, even of /r/conservative is very different than something like truth social. I don't want to be in an echo chamber, and the content from the echo chamber seems tailored to click-bate. i.e. "Watch X DESTROY Y with Logic", or conspiracy theories. I read a variety of news, and I don't need another source for it, but would rather watch discussion unfold about different topics by people who may have different opinions as well.

2. I use Reddit primarily for tech, gaming, programming, gamedev, and programming language related topics or other unrelated things like woodworking or bushcrafting. I like the community-based paradigm to social media for that reason, and that content is almost entirely lacking on conservative social networks.

3. I'm not really a Trump supporter. Truth social I believe is also relatively dead, but I've never joined so I can't verify that.

4. Free speech is extremely important to me. Trolling, hating,etc, should be moderated, but a dissenting opinion written respectively should not be, in my opinion. I'm not sure that Truth Social has reputation as a free speech platform. Reddit as a platform has largely been a free speech platform. Independently moderated subreddits have not. But Lemmy instances seem like they're going to take a stance against any communities or instances that don't fit the ideology.

There is value in open debate and conversation, but it does seem like Lemmy is intended to be a walled left echo chamber. I'm curious if your question is reflective of others' opinions as well, in that they'd prefer people not like them ideologically would just go to their own spaces and leave others alone

Thanks for a comprehensive reply. There might be a market niche then, but we no longer have infinite VC money to for many attempts to plug it. I think the hardest part here is attracting the right moderators that can tread the line between keeping the conversation civil and not enforcing their opinion, which is harder by the day. Both criteria are very subjective and hard to automate.

I'm pretty much of a similar mind. I don't want to be closed off from dissenting opinion. I'm pretty free speech and although I'm not in favor of platform blocking, I'm all for personal blocking, and/or creating niche communities, maybe ones not even federated.

I think there's a lot of value in seeing differing opinions even if you don't agree with them, as long as the discussion remains civil. That goes for myself as much as anyone else, I'm human, but I'll tend to cut off once personal insults are flowing.

I got the domain jump.red a while ago, to make a more conservative/libertarian community... may throw a lemmy instance up this weekend there. Won't necessarily fit the bulk, but I think there's room. Was also thinking on putting up one on the bbs/tech related domains I have.

My plan is to just add a bunch of instances' local feeds to my rss reader and audit them occasionally to check which I like the most.

I'm thinking of joining fmhy, which isn't the most active but is clear about their federation policy and has only defederated from lemmygrad (which seems to be a major source of posts from the group you're referencing)