Well, yeah, I’m not the one claiming to have all the answers. I merely am a witness of my consciousness, so I know that’s a real thing. I describe that whole of consciousness and awareness and “me-ness” as my soul, but I have no hard definition for it, I merely know there’s something there.

Science however is a man-made construct and can only operate on the observable and the independently verifiable. I’m not saying that to diminish its worth, because science is mighty cool, but I simply refuse to take it to the extreme position that anything that cannot be scientifically proven should be assumed not to exist.

I’ve experienced enough weird shit in my life that makes no scientific sense. They still happened though. So rather than denying these things, the sane thing to do is to shrug them off as “it’s dimensions or quantum or whatever” :)

Regarding the quantum physics part, I was referring to the double slit experiment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

Matter can interfere with itself in wave patterns that behave as if the matter no longer exists in a single position, but in all possible positions at once. This shows the matter doesn’t even exist in its physical form anymore while it is part of the wave function. “Quantum particles” are not even a thing, because this effect can be reproduced with large molecules too, and there is no apparent upper limit to this: https://science-atlas.com/strange-news/largest-molecules-yet-become-waves-in-quantum-double-slit-experiment/

This effect is real, and waving it away because it’s supposedly “too small” isn’t making it less so. It’s not too small to measure. The article mentions these molecules were fitting slits that were 50nm in size.

As for the brain waves, it seems we’re talking about different things. Of course we can mess with the brain and alter sensory experiences. But experience and awareness are a bigger thing than merely input/output. That’s something I know to be true about myself, but I suppose you can reason that away. I merely pity those who do.

That's absolutely, demonstrably incorrect. It, like all the other processes, is something that exists in observable space-time dimensions that we can observe. It's a state of matter observable over time.

Do you have some source for that? Would love to see how you measure that?

[…] That's what, simplifying a lot, a quantum effect is

You’re also entirely ignoring the part where matter stops behaving as matter and starts interacting with itself as if you had the white and black marble in your hands at the same time, despite you only having one. This is the “magical” part, because it depends on the presence of the observer whether this effect happens or not.

Yeah, I would consider dogs conscious too, and I suspect all life is, including plants and fungi. I don’t see us making computers with conscious abilities though. Just the fact that there is activity doesn’t define consciousness, it also requires awareness, the experience of being alive.

Does fungi have that? I dunno, and if it does it would have vastly different experiences from us, but I’m pretty sure a computer does not. Maybe it’s because we understand computers too well, or maybe it really is something special to organic matter. What about a computer that has organic parts for entropy as input to its algorithms… I also don’t know 😅

Of course choices are made up by people. Science is made up by people. But if you use science to convince yourself that we have no soul, you better make sure there are no gaps in your reasoning. So long as science’s own experiments contradict each other with regards to the nature of our reality, I’m not going along with such denialism.

Sorry, but simply saying no doesn’t make it so. Entanglement directly contradicts the laws of general relativity when it comes to time and space, so either general relativity (and with that, everything we know about time and space) goes out the window, or there is more than just time and space. You can’t have it both ways.

But do you have an alternative explanation? Because without one, I have no alternative but to admit there must be something more, regardless of whether you wish to call it a dimension or something else.

What we do know however, is that entanglement is not constrained to the dimensions of time and space. So the existence of additional dimensions seems a rather logical leap, even if indeed technically speculation, because we don’t know how they work.

I didn’t mean to imply they’re the same thing. I responded with some more depths to the other replies.

The brain is our thinking device, but ultimately it’s “just” a clever piece of meat. But consciousness is something that exists outside the dimensions of space and time, yet is able to influence those dimensions. A higher-order dimension, if you will. That’s maybe a bit of a spiritually elusive way to frame it, but that’s because science cannot explain it either.

Science knows there are other dimensions. Quantum physics proves this with entanglement and the particle-wave duality. Within quantum physics there is also the “magical” notion of the observer, where nobody knows exactly how to define what an observer. It seems linked to consciousness, but some people get very angry if you suggest that, because we cannot prove it and it breaks their illusion that physical reality is all there is.

Anyway, if you are in the camp that thinks there is nothing beyond physical, then sure, it’s the brain. But if you’re a bit more open minded, then it’s also more than just the brain.

It might be interesting to explore views of the soul outside of Western religion. I would agree that the soul is immaterial, though the immortal part I obviously can’t be sure about.

The thing is, science is still puzzled as to what consciousness even is or why we have it. Philosophically speaking, you can even argue that science is fundamentally unable to answer those questions, because science relies on observation and we cannot observe the consciousness of other humans, only ourselves. From what we know, it seems to be immaterial with an ability to influence the physical world that defies explanation (see how the observer in quantum physics is responsible for collapsing the wave function, but nobody can identify what constitutes observation beyond whatever information can reach us—whoever “us” is in that equation).

So yeah, I’ll grant you it’s easier to achieve than a religious definition, but I would be very curious to see AI replicate that :)

It’s the thing that grants you consciousness. You do have consciousness, don’t you?

Ah yes, that makes sense. Curious what it points to then when empty…

Vec::into_parts() returns a NonNull pointer, but isn’t the pointer allowed to be null if the vector is empty? I would expect that this method should be able to return a null pointer, but I’m probably missing something…

I used Elixir for a project in 2024, though I was not the lead on the backend part, so my exposure was limited. Still got a nice taste of it, and have to say I was positively impressed.

The Erlang VM is kind of amazing in the capabilities that it offers, and integrating with external languages was also easier than I thought it would be (we had a Rust core that we needed to link in).

As for Elixir specifically: the language is nice, but its Achilles heel is definitely that it’s dynamically typed. For this reason I would suggest having a look at GLEAM, even though I have no personal experience with that and don’t know how mature it is.

Narrator: Rust has indeed already proven a very valid alternative.

Heh, the name wasn’t chosen to reach a huge audience anyway. If I get too many users, I might lose my zen over trying to support them 😂

But I’m happy to have a few folks along who don’t mind building their IDE from source.

Thanks!

As for the motivation of the fork, basically two reasons:

• Even though you can disable AI features and configure the layout, the teasers and some UI elements remain as they try to draw you in.
• I want to use their UI framework and editor for a different project too, so I want to be able to start that from a trimmed down base anyway.

Hehe, I suppose it might to some extent 😅 But well, I don't wish to control how others do their coding, and it would be silly to ignore other's code altogether because they used a different method than the one I prefer.

Yeah, if you don't mind the UI clutter/teasers, it doesn't make much of a difference. For now, the most noticeable difference is that the default layout is more old-school, with the project layout and the git panel on the left-hand side again, though even without this fork you can configure it to be like that too.

Nothing wrong with them! But since I want to build another tool on top of it (for fiction/novel outlining and writing) I figured this was a good exercise to become familiar with the codebase. And since I still do some Rust development, having control over both my IDE and my writing software seemed an added benefit :)