2025/05/04

Newest at the top

2025-05-04 14:53:09 +0200aljazmc(~aljazmc@user/aljazmc) (Quit: Leaving)
2025-05-04 14:53:02 +0200euleritian(~euleritia@dynamic-176-006-131-173.176.6.pool.telefonica.de)
2025-05-04 14:51:52 +0200euleritian(~euleritia@ip4d17f82f.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-05-04 14:45:26 +0200 <[exa]> turns out I already classified it as such like 2 years ago :D
2025-05-04 14:44:57 +0200 <[exa]> hellwolf: oh hvm is the thing with the "MAGIC" wannabe meme in the main readme
2025-05-04 14:43:55 +0200lxsameer(~lxsameer@Serene/lxsameer) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-05-04 14:42:42 +0200tremon(~tremon@83.80.159.219) tremon
2025-05-04 14:41:12 +0200haskellbridgehellwolf go doing something relax too. enjoy your sunday folks
2025-05-04 14:40:46 +0200 <[exa]> tomsmeding: np enjoy the sunday :D
2025-05-04 14:40:28 +0200 <haskellbridge> <hellwolf> I know what you mean. But I will not be so quick to judge.
2025-05-04 14:40:10 +0200 <tomsmeding> *sorry
2025-05-04 14:40:05 +0200tomsmedingis afk for a while, sory
2025-05-04 14:39:53 +0200 <[exa]> hellwolf: I'd classify as scam tbh
2025-05-04 14:39:45 +0200ljdarj(~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) ljdarj
2025-05-04 14:39:28 +0200 <haskellbridge> <hellwolf> - bias of selling before confirmed result.
2025-05-04 14:39:17 +0200 <tomsmeding> I see
2025-05-04 14:39:01 +0200 <tomsmeding> and that sounds limited, but if you want something more than can be expressed to an engine like that, things become very hard, very undecidable, very quickly
2025-05-04 14:38:52 +0200 <[exa]> tomsmeding: the issue is that my "instructions" won't very "simple" (usually multiple effects tied together), so just going the syntax way ("forth is instructions!") is going to be brutally bad
2025-05-04 14:38:41 +0200 <haskellbridge> <hellwolf> https://x.com/VictorTaelin he is the frontman doing it. There is this VC vibe thing: so, there is sometimes selling before confirmation bias, but there are some interesting bits from time to time. I don't fully follow, tbh
2025-05-04 14:38:18 +0200 <tomsmeding> and I mean, coding up a simple engine that tries to deduce a sequent from given ones with BFS isn't too hrad
2025-05-04 14:37:20 +0200 <tomsmeding> [exa]: oh that definitely sounds like program synthesis :p
2025-05-04 14:36:52 +0200 <[exa]> hellwolf: what's hvm and neogen? (googling leads to either twiddler or spam, which is sus)
2025-05-04 14:35:31 +0200 <[exa]> and yeah well it's actually prolog. I want to write constraints on what holds "before" and should hold "after" the program, and the thing would ideally fill in some "middle" so that the "after" is satisfied.
2025-05-04 14:35:19 +0200 <haskellbridge> <hellwolf> I think the hvm person is doing this entire neogen thing, banking on LLM model.
2025-05-04 14:32:31 +0200 <[exa]> tomsmeding: I've just started reading up on the whole topic. Looks like I wanted more of a program synthesis. :D
2025-05-04 14:31:23 +0200 <[exa]> hellwolf: if the heuristic is "there was more chat about it on the internet", it's going great.
2025-05-04 14:26:50 +0200 <haskellbridge> <hellwolf> I wonder how well LLM nowadays to cope with these sort of things when it comes to heuristics
2025-05-04 14:22:24 +0200 <tomsmeding> and do you want there to be proof search or just checking of manual proofs
2025-05-04 14:21:47 +0200 <tomsmeding> what kind of things do you want to prove?
2025-05-04 14:21:16 +0200 <tomsmeding> I mean you can actually model a proof checker, but at that point you're writing what you're asking already exists, I guess :p
2025-05-04 14:16:02 +0200 <[exa]> s/List/Logic/
2025-05-04 14:15:19 +0200 <[exa]> tomsmeding: yeah like I could go full ListT but I guess it will need heuristics
2025-05-04 14:14:12 +0200tolgo(~Thunderbi@199.115.144.130) (Client Quit)
2025-05-04 14:11:57 +0200tolgo(~Thunderbi@199.115.144.130)
2025-05-04 14:05:46 +0200target_i(~target_i@user/target-i/x-6023099) target_i
2025-05-04 14:04:14 +0200 <tomsmeding> prolog?
2025-05-04 14:01:26 +0200 <[exa]> the issue with the theorem provers I see is that they kinda assume some particular fixed algebra (some kind of logic), I need some freedom in there without having to encode stuff too much.
2025-05-04 13:58:47 +0200 <[exa]> s/if //
2025-05-04 13:58:36 +0200 <[exa]> are there some good "small" libraries theorem proving? E.g. I've got an algebra, a few axioms on it, and I want to see how the axioms can be combined to derive some expression in the algebra. Ideally if axiom schemes are supported.
2025-05-04 13:52:15 +0200euleritian(~euleritia@ip4d17f82f.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de)
2025-05-04 13:51:45 +0200euleritian(~euleritia@dynamic-176-006-131-173.176.6.pool.telefonica.de) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2025-05-04 13:51:28 +0200lxsameer(~lxsameer@Serene/lxsameer) lxsameer
2025-05-04 13:45:09 +0200euphores(~SASL_euph@user/euphores) euphores
2025-05-04 13:38:10 +0200euphores(~SASL_euph@user/euphores) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-05-04 13:25:08 +0200acidjnk_new3(~acidjnk@p200300d6e71c4f524d98fe298d45bbdf.dip0.t-ipconnect.de)
2025-05-04 13:16:15 +0200gabiruh(~gabiruh@vps19177.publiccloud.com.br) gabiruh
2025-05-04 13:13:44 +0200acidjnk_new3(~acidjnk@p200300d6e71c4f525d73c8bc79cfad4f.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2025-05-04 13:08:16 +0200aljazmc(~aljazmc@user/aljazmc) aljazmc
2025-05-04 13:07:59 +0200aljazmc(~aljazmc@user/aljazmc) (Quit: Leaving)
2025-05-04 13:07:29 +0200__monty__(~toonn@user/toonn) (Quit: leaving)