u_tamtam @ u_tamtam @programming.dev

Posts

6

Comments

454

Joined

2 yr. ago

EUV is complex. And more so than the accomplishments you mentioned: nuclear weapons were cracked in the 1940's, probe moon landings in the 50's and space stations in the 70's. All have since been reproduced by several nations in isolation. That is not the case of state of the art lithography. No single nation "owns" it because it truly is a multinational endeavor.

(And actual hypersonic missiles haven't made it to the battlefield, and 5G is about commoditization and standardization, by the ITU, an organ of the united nations, so I'm not sure exactly how that adds to your rhetoric)

smuglord

Way to put your ignorance on display.

Ok, but what the heck does that reply have to do with anything?

You obviously fall into the trap of believing that hard science cares about politics, and that money thrown at problems as part of national strategic planning magically solves them. But for anyone else legitimately interested in understanding the topic better and having a glimpse at its complexity, those are great resources:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmgkV83OhHA
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ge2RcvDlgw

If the above is too advanced, this can serve as a good primer and answers "how the heck did we get there": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt9NEnWmyMo

Also, I never wrote that China will never get to EUV (or eventually something beyond that), just that it will take a very long time, because the complexity is spread across several very distinct scientific disciplines, integrating them is a challenge of its own (again, watch the videos), and packaging this into a system that meets the scale and reliability requirements to make it commercially viable hasn't been reproduced to date.

I mean, the internet was fine until the advent of global "engagement-driven social networks" that practically became filter bubbles optimizing for ads delivery, then echo chambers for political gain, down to self-sustained propaganda machines for geopolitical sabotage. Early internet felt like village-scale communities centered around a single purpose/interests where people came in the first place to contribute something or help each other. Trolls did exist but there was no tolerance for them because the absence of centralization meant they didn't have to be accepted there in the first place.

Yup, though you are comparing 19th century tech to cutting edge tech: the PRC isn't going to crack EUV lithography on its own any time soon

Would be nice to be able to run WG on the NAS directly and not need a server, wouldn't it? I believe there are a few go/rust userspace WG servers out there but I don't know if anyone's using them for anything like that.

What is "old arse" to you might be blazing fast and great for someone else (potentially in a less fortunate area of this world), and besides that, no matter your or my sensobilities, if it works, it works and should be kept that way as long as it has a purpose and the hardware permits it.

Except for a marginal fraction of the top YouTubers, aren't most of them getting paid to inject sponsored links and from donations/patronage these days? It seems that the deal you are referring to has been off the table for a majority of YouTubers for a very long time now, and I don't see why other platforms wouldn't be as good, or even healthier than YouTube to provide them that kind of revenue.

No better way to boost diversion, and probably a net win for the planet considering how dirty and environmentally harmful the rare earth supply chain is today.

unison is currently the closest to showing how it is actually done

What makes you say that? As far as I'm aware, even the theoretical soundness of it isn't a done deal (this is a harder nut to crack than e.g. rust's borrow checker)

Overall, I think one of 2 things will happen:

In this niche, perhaps, I don't believe any of those will gain mainstream adoption (though I hope I'm wrong)

So you would need different later heights around the edges just to stack those ever thinner lines? How do you think this will interact with the rest of the print?

functional languages aren’t battle tested or imply they aren’t useful in real world problem solving

Yup, I never said that, though? What I was about was to draw a parallel between functional programming languages and explorations from several decades ago vs the new languages and explorations going into effect typing/capabilities programming now (and the long way ahead for those).

What I find interesting is that those pioneering FP languages never came to top the popularity chart, implying that I'm not expecting Unison to be different (but the good parts might make it into Java/C#/Python/… many years from now).

"Capabilities" is the new "Functional Programming" of decades prior,

Scala is also expanding in this area via the Caprese project: https://docs.scala-lang.org/scala3/reference/experimental/cc.html and it promises Safe Exceptions, Safe Nullability, Safe Asynchronicity in direct style/without the "what color is your function" dilemma, delineation of pure vs impure functions, … even Rust's borrow checker (and memory guarantees) becomes a special case of Capabilities.

I believe this is a major paradigm shift, but the ergonomics have yet to be figured out and be battle-tested in the real world. Ultimately, like for Functional Programming Languages (OCaml, F#, Haskell, …) I don't expect pionniers like Unison/Koka/Scala to ever become mainstream, but the "good parts" to be ported to ever the more complex and clunky "general purpose" programming languages (or, why I love Scala which is multiparadigm and still very thin/clean at its core).

We are past peak oil, the world is already transitioning away from fossil, out of sheer necessity, because of the finiteness of conventional resources. Everyone involved knows that. The only "problem" is the timeframe: there's about a decade left of investments towards capacity increase at the current pace before going over the carbon budget for a 2°C warming scenario. That's a tough deadline to navigate for those countries.

Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF) says China was the world’s leading producer in 2020 in seven of the 10 industries covered by its report

Curious, I wonder what might have happened to the world in 2020

Yup, absolutely, it's a good idea. Did you think of creating a feature request on their bug tracker? https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/issues

individual toolsets (2D Animation, Video Editing, VFX, Sculpting, Poly Modeling, Bone Rigging, Scripting – ALL with entire workflows associated with them) – has managed to be a wildly usable solution despite many of its individual subsystems working together.

Yup, I believe this boils down to good project management, someone has to steer those individual components so they work together better, in a cohesive manner, to make the result more than the sum its the parts. This is especially difficult in an opensource context where different contributors have different interests, and I think Blender, having managed that much, is an example to follow.

And I agree with everything you wrote, I don't expect FreeCAD to get there in a reasonable timeframe unless it gets serious funding and expertise brought in.

Plasticity is a good project to follow, I don't think they are comparable nor intended for the same audience, but there are product design aspects to learn from it, definitely :)

Oh, I think I understand. I generally select a bunch of things and use https://wiki.freecad.org/Sketcher_ConstrainEqual and never thought of selecting the dimensions directly. That sounds like a good idea/convenience indeed :)

Totally fair and fine :) Having kept an eye on the project for several years already, I think it's heading in the right direction (and no alternative has emerged), but yeah, the road ahead is very long!

it's a bit annoying when you can't click something to use as a reference.

You mean, that? https://youtu.be/x7_KgeLOcKY?feature=shared