Absolutely beautiful story thank you so much for sharing.
I don't mind AI translation at all. The style comes off as a bit weird indeed, but I just took it off as a style I'm not used to because it comes from a different culture than mine. I wouldn't mind much the naysayers, I'd like to see them posting something in chinese and see how they'd like it ;)
I really enjoyed the writing style actually, all these different anectodes condensed in shorter sentences, without fluff or trying to connect them in a single narrative. Maybe this is not the correct way to put it, but I'm also not a native English speaker nor I have any classical training in writing.
Yours is the first substack I ever subscribed to and can't wait to read part two. It actually pushed me to start writing some of my childhood experiences.
Thank you so much! I hope LLM didn't ruin the vibe, so I edited many times, but still, english is not my first language, so it probably still "looks like AI". I will try my best and I will post part 2 on Monday.
Try machine translation not general LLM based ones. Google translate does use an LLM, Gemini, now for translation, but it preserves the nuances of your own speech instead of injecting the clear markers of LLMs like you'd get if you tried to do it via Gemini or ChatGPT directly.
So, write your replies in your native language then post them into Google translate, I guarantee it'll sound better and people won't think it's an LLM.
TLDR yes it now uses Gemini which actually understands idioms etc over the previous Google translate. More importantly, it doesn't rewrite your text to sound more like AI which you see on this thread already with OP using ChatGPT to translate. Works for any language.
That's such a great use of an LLM! Thanks for sharing!
Unfortunately the ever-present desire for the moneys made folks use LLMs to produce lots and lots of slop, polluting not just the web but even the trust to each other. The default nowadays when reading a piece of text that has even the slightest LLM vibe is to assume it's made-up slop. That's very sad, but necessary, because it's just everywhere.
It's so sad because the tech could really bring people together. Creating almost seemless translations. That's why your work is such a great example for the good this could bring if we'd not have so many greedy people among us.
I'm not sure if you are implying that you aren't using remix anymore after the rebranding, or that it's not a framework anymore?
Because React Router 7 definitely works as a framework [1] and it works like a charm.
Source: Backend developer with 15 years experience, lately switched to full stack, using RR7 after advice from a very good friend, still getting amazed every day.
Remix still works fine. React router v7? Well, I guess? Ever since I switched that on the project all my types come out weird. It’s not the end of the world, but remix is a framework, react-router is a component. Now they’ve conflated the two, and it just doesn’t work for me.
This is amazing. I started playing it with my morning coffee and somehow it became 1pm...
Despite what other people commented, I really liked not really knowing what happens with some (most?) of the updated and having to try them to understand what they do and how to combine them. The last part is especially true: it was just SO SATISFYING when I realized that a perk I hated became my favourite once I was able to pair it properly and catch waterfall of coins :)
One thing I still don't get at all are the white and red ball "paths" that briefly appear from time to time. I don't get what they represent nor how are they triggered, especially as it doesn't look like the ball will actually do that exact path after it hits the puck (if I don't move it). It's a little annoying for the red one, that resets your coin counter, because I can't understand if I can avoid it somehow or do I have to take it as a "random debuff".
Thanks. I guess one perk i could add is "3 random perks" where you have to figure out what you got haha. The flashing lines you see are signaling that you missed the bricks and didn't hit any. That will reset your combo. If you manage to never miss in a level, you'll get and extra upgrade and choice. If you miss less than 3 times, you'll just get an extra choice.
One of my hangups to start strength training at the ripe age of 41, is that I'm terrified of hurting myself.
Apparently to do "proper" strength training you need to focus on the free weights, or compound lifts, rather than gym machines that guide your movements. I.E. squats, deadlifts, bench presses, etc.
The problem is that these are EXACTLY the type of exercises that an untrained, anterior pelvic tilted computer long-time dweller will do wrongly as they don't have the right flexibility or skills or knowledge about how to do them right.
I remember how close I was to messing up my back permanently with deadlifts, and that was in my 20s. Thinking about going to the gym and starting doing them again unsupervised at my age is, to me, madness.
I really wish if someone could give me some advice in this matter...
The age old advice that bad form will wreck your body is false. Now, yes, extremely bad form when lifting heavy weights may cause injury. But when starting out and learning the movements, the weight should be light. Usually it's not the technique that causes injury but other things like increasing volume too quickly from what you're used to, life stressors, lack of sleep etc.
It's very rare to start doing a set of squats for example and all of a sudden have a catastrophic back tweak because of your bad form. Lifting is safer than most sports!
Check out this article on barbell medicine about pain and their other stuff too:
As a beginner, you are too weak to move weights that can really hurt you. 41 also isn't really old for lifting. People still set world records at that age.
Strength sports are statistically among the safest. They are significantly safer than team sports or even cycling.
If you ease into it, progress slowly, make sure pain does not go above 5/10, you are unlikely to injure yourself. In fact, you will likely prevent future injury. You're not going to injure your back lifting your nephew when you are deadlifting over 100 kg.
If you check out barbell medicine, Alan Thrall, or Dr. Mike Israetel on YouTube, you will find simple form tutorials.
Finally, of course you can get stronger using machines. Compound movements may be the most efficient ones but as long as your muscles are generating force close to their maximum capability, they will get a training impulse.
I started strength training this year (I’m 40). I started StrongLifts 5x5 on Jan 1 and have been consistent with the 3x per week. You start with just an empty bar to focus on form, and build up, 5lbs per exercise per day until it becomes too much and then you slow the progression. It was perfect for building proper form and then building strength. Haven’t been injured yet and I’d recommend it easily to anyone our age who is a beginner. The website is extremely informative and there are lots of YouTube videos to supplement for form cues.
There are plenty of ways to injure yourself on machines.
There are some specific dangers to free weights that aren't there with machines, e.g. if you are bench pressing outside a rack and you drop the weight on your throat, that's not the sort of thing that can happen with a machine, but... just bench press inside a rack if you don't have a spotter.
Either way, I'd recommend you get a trainer. Find a gym focusing on free weights. There's Starting Strength and affiliated gyms all over the country, there's barbell focused gyms everywhere, etc. At the very least when starting out, having someone that can help you get into proper form is really beneficial. You don't need to keep them long term, but they can be invaluable starting out.
There's also lots of places where you can record yourself working out and post a video and get feedback. You're not going to sever your spinal column squatting the bar or deadlifting with a pair of 10lb plates even if your form is garbage, so you can start light and have people help you get your form fixed.
Start light, take a class (or get a trainer if you're rich) to correct your form issues. I went to a class, and the coach literally had me doing dead-lifts on a broom-handle while others were stacking the 100# plates on the sides of their bars. Everybody was super encouraging too.
You can also check out "The Barbell Prescription" by Andy Baker. This book is like Starting Strength but for the 45+ demographic. (Interestingly, Starting Strength can be used for this demographic also.)
There have been documented instances of older folks reversing degenerative conditions after picking up strength training. You're also never old enough to get stronger!
That said, finding a trainer that knows what they are doing is the fastest way to progress. I'm biased towards the Starting Strength community as these trainers undergo an intensive program before they are certified to be an SS coach (on top of their past intensive training), but there are many other qualified trainers out there.
Yeah if you come into strength training with a lot of imbalances you may very well have a bad time. Unless you're particulalry fucked, it doesn't manifest right away. But injury risk does scale with weight lifted - the more weight your move the worse strains if you misgroove because bad leverages/geometry magnify with weight. Bar path being off a couple inches lifting 135 feels very different lifting 495.
On the other hand, nothing like desire to improve numbers to drive one to unfuck their their body.
My understanding was that's meant to be a way "ordinary people" () can contribute to the project by seeding one or more torrents with a part of their archive contents, to try and achieve a sort of "distributed backup", and it's not meant as a way for final users to get that one book they need.
() that is, people that can't run a IPFS node or other advanced options due to their limited space/network/skills/money.
BTW Your "Advanced ESP32 development with ESP-IDF" guide [1] is the best "getting started" guide I've seen so far. Up to now no guide has been so clear and complete, and I've spent one week being very frustrated by how confusing the official ones are.
So thank you again. You made me rekindle the spark of creativeness that got buried by age and daily grind.
> Today, I’d like to close this gap with a couple of crisp definitions that stay clear of flawed hydraulic analogies, but also don’t get bogged down by differential equations or complex number algebra.
Related: many, many years ago, when Facebook didn't exist yet, Google still passed as a "good" company, and hobbyist electronic geeks had almost only PICs to choose from, I found online a very long and complete electronic course that went from 0 to basic R/C concepts, to transistors, up to pretty advanced topics like magnets/transformers and IIRC radio too.
It was made of pretty raw HTML pages and images, and what was most peculiar about it was that it managed to explain a lot of concepts up to an applicable level (as in, actually designing analog circuits) without (any?) calculus at all.
Some of those may be false memories, but if I remember correctly:
* Its HTML style had a yellowy background
* It was taken from an old-ish (US?) navy electric engineer-focused applied electronics course for training naval engineers.
* It was more focused on analog circuits
I remember I downloaded it all but after all those years who knows where it could be. Maybe in some 1GB disk of my first Pentium PC, so it's basically lost.
Does anyone in HN knows what I'm talking about? I was never able to find it again.
(replying to myself since I can't edit) In retrospect, I wonder if [the person I'm replying to] was referring to a different link in this thread, such as the rimstar one, which is pretty bad.
I want to say that’s cool, avoid common pitfalls in explanations, but I want to to point out that all analogies fall short, otherwise they would be the same thing, and not an analogy.
That is, if the hydraulic analogy were perfect, then that would mean that electronics would just behave as a fluid and we could teach it an a part of fluid dynamics.
But instead it is an analogy, electronics is not a part of fluid dynamics, there’s just a few similarities that can be used for teaching.
It’s not unusual to teach an imperfect simplistic model at first that you intend to supplement later with more details that break the analogy.
Use some rubber dams or flexible pipes for the capacitors, one-way backstop valves for the diodes, and then some back-and-forth pumping mechanism to generate water AC. It should work.
Is Fastmail an US company though?