Comments by "" (@diadetediotedio6918) on "Mental Outlaw" channel.

  1. 15:30 There is IPFS too, you need not to depend on cloud
    2
  2.  @ducksies  Oh yes, that I agree. From what I've seen, however, there already exists at least one crate that seeks to allow explicit tail calls in the language, and a proposal is in progress, but I've never tested them to make sure they work as expected.
    2
  3. You're pretty wrong
    2
  4.  @Dacdac839  You mean self defense?
    2
  5.  @citrusNikOs  Cargo is not strictly centralized, it's a repository system, you can self-host your own server if that bothers you. It's also not an unnecessarily complex system, most modern languages literally have package management systems native to the ecosystem.
    2
  6. If you don't care about your freedom or privacy, then continue as you are.
    2
  7.  @FredericodeOliveiraLinhares  I don't get it dear, there is insecure code in virtually everything, the point of Rust is that it lessens the need to write insecure code <all the time>. Just look at Asahi Lina's amazing work on the M1 GPU drivers, where she attributed an immensely greater ease in working with Rust compared to C precisely due to all the properties of the language.
    2
  8.  @Tibor0991  I always avoid saying empty words dear. Of course, this time was no different. Racing conditions are an extremely common problem in languages like C/C++ and even erratic deviants like C# (and I say this being a programmer in this language for a considerable amount of time). I don't even consider myself a Rust programmer (at the moment), but someone who is checking its usability, I just note that the language makes it incredibly difficult to cause racing conditions (a good part of the causes of them at least) if you stay within the limits of the language rules.
    2
  9.  @heinzerbrew  Basically, some programming languages can generate different metadata in each compilation (such as the compilation or generation date of some file), so the deterministic mode (if any) is a way to prevent this from happening and that only files without changes are compiled, this is guaranteed to produce the same output file as long as the build settings are the same and the source code compiled as well (of course, make sure the source you are going to check has the same version as the binary).
    2
  10. I think the most important point here is to recognize that people, even the most capable and well-trained, simply make mistakes, and that those mistakes can cost people abysmal. When you understand this you will see how using a tool that reduces the risk of these accidents (which are called that literally because they are not predictable) is really useful.
    2
  11. I think you are just biased. When Linus wrote the kernel in C, the language was 19 years old, Rust is already 12, going to 13, that's not much different.
    1
  12.  @thewitheredstriker  This is because nowadays the amount of low-level programming is infinitely less than the amount of high-level programming, which wasn't exactly like that at the time (and let's face it, C didn't last that long, most companies in the 2000s had a good part of their plastered systems made in Java and languages ​​other than C, even banking systems used COBOL and not C, it's not like C The programming language), not to mention that in that era most of the systems we use today were being written. Nowadays for a language with the ambitions of rust to prevail and become mainstream, it first needs to be effectively adopted, which effectively won't happen if we stop using it because it's not established (that would be a vicious circle), re-writing systems from scratch is simply impossible, the cost is gigantic and would be impractical for the overwhelming majority of corporations, hiring new programmers too, and even training existing ones would be costly, which is precisely why adoption is not so fast ( the fact that Rust has a relatively high learning curve doesn't help with that). In terms of stability, on the other hand, the language appears to have few bugs and it doesn't seem to be the case that it is static, it has an active community and people are willing to use it, think about what Linux itself would have been like if people never had given it a chance in the first place? At the end of the day, it all comes down to cost, and it seems big companies are starting to look at Rust as more cost-effective than not using it (we're seeing movement in big companies like Amazon, and Microsoft itself recently, and even Dropbox has a significant portion of its systems written in the language), every new technology not established is a gamble until it isn't, which is why the world moves slowly (e.g. we still don't have IPv6 in, I would say, more than 50% of places in my country).
    1
  13.  @mavhunter8753  That's stupid. C# also has an unsafe keyword to do things that normally wouldn't be possible in the language in its most secure form, this is just to lessen as much as possible the need to make unsafe code (which will always exist). You understand the point of decreasing something, right?
    1
  14. Why the heck are all this commie bots spitting bs here in a channel called mental <outlaw>?
    1
  15. Por que diachos esse canal está cheio de lambedores de botas? A droga do nome é literalmente mental <outlaw>.
    1
  16. ​ @isaac6705  I'm not denying this, I'm denying that this is not what makes companies usually go round. Obviously there is internal software everywhere. but most people don't want to simply make a software with GPL and "use it internally", they want to release a product, to make something to sell or to distribute in some ways, which is my point. Also, what the heck you mean with "GPL fanatics"?
    1
  17. ​ @davidchristenes9062  "0%" with one of the highest inflation rates in the world, good lie. Everything is getting more and more expensive by the day, and censorship is getting more and more problematic.
    1
  18. Parasites trying to control the entirely of human life, absolutely unexpected
    1
  19.  @DJDocsVideos  I like it, should be called BGBH license
    1
  20.  @criticalevent  This is literally the extreme opposite of what the brazillian system is. We have literal communists in the government. If something the center is more of a power thing here.
    1
  21. That's why we use cryptography
    1
  22.  @rogo7330  yes.
    1
  23. Stop being a fricking bootlicker.
    1
  24. Anyone who knows 1% of what cryptography is knows that this is a bad idea in every possible sense of the term.
    1
  25. By commonly used definitions almost any language that is not strictly C or ASM is going to be OOP, so why bother?
    1
  26.  @ryuunosuk3  That's a win-win, when "soy-drinking zoomers" make eletricity all the humanity is benefited with machines instead relying in man-made thinks
    1
  27.  @raizenxdd  But are you fine using stuff created by homossexuals? What a double standart! AHAHAHAHAHA
    1
  28. Yeah!
    1
  29.  @meanmole3212  I don't understand, how could that be a reason not to learn rust?
    1
  30. lmao
    1
  31. 4:20 From where this information come from?
    1
  32. ​ @twl148  No, I was talking about his affirmation about most of the people do not understanding the implications of the technology and not being anarchists, from what I know most of the original holders of bitcoin (the holders with most of the coins) are literally libertarians, including Satoshi itself (according to the Wendy McElroy investigation).
    1
  33. [Chad rust devs stating the obvious] [Soyboy programmers of C++, a language that will never get into the kernel, crying] [Chad C programmers with conscience about human errors considering it can be a good test] [Soyboy C/C++ programmers (bad or just plain old programmers) crying because their favorite language is considered unsafe]
    1
  34. @QUAD DAMAGE It was supposed to be a joke to people here who use those terms, a reversal of irony so to speak.
    1
  35. Rust is not from Mozilla nowadays
    1
  36.  @kelvino.s.9992  Saaaaalve Kelvin!
    1
  37. ​ @EivindFalken  What is not organic is all the bullshit hate on the language, this shit is in almost literally every single slighly famous video that mentions rust out there.
    1
  38. monero is not "gimmicks", lol.
    1
  39.  @OldieBugger  No.
    1
  40.  @amogoose2971  It is not.
    1
  41. ​ @happygofishing  No, it literally does. What you are even saying? This don't make any sense, are people crazy nowadays? See, you, NOW, have the FREEDOM to pick a fork and stick in someone's else throat. You would obviously be violating the freedom of that person and his personal integrity, but YET, you have that freedom. Freedom implies freedom to not do something good as well as freedom to CHOOSE to do something good (in fact, if you don't have a choice there's nothing "deserving" or good in the action, you must first be free to make virtuous actions). What those licenses mean is that you are ABLE to use the code in your own ways, this don't imply you WOULD, it also don't OBLIGATE you to do it. In fact, refraining from do so is MUCH more virtuous than just using copyleft licenses where you are obligated to it all together.
    1
  42. ​ @z411_cl  This is not a good definition or conceptualization of freedom. If you take the freedom of people to do things, no matter how much time passes, it will still be less free than the alternative of [not doing it], the fact that you believe it is more free because it allows a specific property you want (in this case, the prohibition of releasing software without the source) don't make it less problematic over time. I also don't think MIT, Apache or BSD are the pinacle of freedom, just so you know, I think a more free license would block things like suing people and allowing for all people to reverse engineer your code and even sell modified versions it (without using your name, obviously), it would be something that restricts only the truly evil things that most people can't fight against, like using the power of state to crush people down, but I don't think if a license like this is possible, I'm not a lawyer.
    1
  43.  @dynfoxx  chad anime girl with programming skills
    1
  44. The government funds companies to crack the Monero blockchain precisely because it causes them so much trouble, if they could have done something like this they would have done it already.
    1
  45. Because better than buying is mining
    1
  46. Why?
    1
  47. bias, ooooooh the bias
    1
  48. Why do you think that?
    1
  49. Just to point out: market value does not necessarily imply the amount of money you can spend, and generally these mentioned countries make trillions of dollars from their citizens every year through the institutionalized theft that is the tax, but I do not disagree that Apple (and other big corporations) are shit.
    1
  50. Lol, do you even know who is the creator of Monero?
    1