Youtube comments of Anony Mousse (@anon_y_mousse).
-
2200
-
1300
-
1100
-
921
-
819
-
744
-
512
-
470
-
446
-
392
-
350
-
346
-
330
-
305
-
301
-
277
-
268
-
226
-
218
-
196
-
190
-
168
-
162
-
148
-
119
-
104
-
103
-
102
-
99
-
95
-
89
-
84
-
79
-
72
-
70
-
69
-
66
-
65
-
65
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
62
-
61
-
61
-
60
-
59
-
58
-
56
-
55
-
54
-
52
-
51
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
@graealex Just imagine the possibilities. As a programmer, I don't generally like RISC over CISC, especially if I have to do anything in assembly, but with an open architecture, and one that is already capable of running a full desktop O/S, I'm excited. I think at this point, the next step should be figuring out how to manufacture at cheaper facilities and for a cheaper price. Yeah, even above optimization. There are videos of people making their own IC's in home labs. I'm hoping the next step is full chips, albeit simple ones, and eventually home chip printers like we have 3D printers now. The future I envisioned as a kid is coming true in my lifetime, and I like it.
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
If it only broke EAC, I'd say good, but as we all know, it wouldn't stop there, because every program that uses EAC wouldn't necessarily get an update. I don't know if EAC is implemented as a dynamic library which could easily be replaced, but I doubt it, and if this change in any way affected its ABI then it wouldn't matter. I guess it boils down to how good of a programmer are they. I'd wager abysmal, but then again I'm a pessimist. And since it didn't break just EAC, and since it's only 16k, and since a stable platform is a better platform, I'd say they need to go back and make it the default again.
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
To clarify, it's not that C, or for that matter C++, are unsafe languages, rather that too many programmers are unsafe. Rust doesn't actually provide a guarantee about safety, regardless of what its proponents will say, but it makes it slightly more difficult to do certain unsafe things by mistake. However, if you have to use an unsafe keyword, already a design mistake there, then you're going to be without certain protections. If you have to abstract around the use of the unsafe keyword it separates your code in an unnatural way that will make it harder to debug. So either you overuse the unsafe keyword and constructs that go with it, or you abstract. Neither is good, especially at kernel level. What we really need is better programmers who actually understand the underlying hardware and can write safe code. The most prevalent errors that programmers make are ones that are super easy to prevent, regardless of language. At least if you're not a dingus.
11
-
11
-
I completely disagree with your stance on the EFF. I don't think they're at all being weirdos or wanting children to look at adult content. The issue is one of free speech and I'm an absolutist on that particular subject. You made an awful lot of comparisons of apples and oranges, but adult content in its printed form is not going to enable a school shooting or drug use. Another thought that immediately came to mind is that an in-person identification check involves some clerk looking at a tiny card for two seconds and promptly forgetting what they've seen. A check on a website will result in your information being permanently stored in a database that will be cracked in three months and sold around the world losing you money or job opportunities or even personal relationships.
Where most disagree with me, and I'd imagine no one will see this because YouTube keeps suppressing my comments, is that I don't think there should be an ID check in-person either. I take more of an Amish stance on rearing children where while they're underage they shouldn't be out of adult supervision. If they're in a store that sells adult content, a parent or adult guardian should be present to prevent them even handling such material from any shelf, let alone to buy it. You do have the right idea when it comes to internet usage and at home it shouldn't be openly accessible from any device that you allow your children to use. I would argue that until they're an adult they shouldn't have more than a JitterBug as a cell phone. Not the newer "smart" phone style versions, but the flip phone with a black and white matrix screen. Tablets with wi-fi and no ability to access the internet through any cell tower so you can restrict access with your home router.
As for the talk on religions, I take the stance that Catholicism is a cult. Prove me wrong. However, that said, I'm not a Christian either, and while I respect most Christian denominations, I see a lot of modern day corruption in the various sects. Maybe you agree, or maybe not, but I think Judaism is quite possibly the only true religion that hasn't been corrupted. I would argue that Islam was corrupt from the start, as a converse to that argument. Quite frankly, I'd be shocked if even one person agreed with this comment in part or in whole. I have a somewhat unique stance on a lot of things as I've discovered the more people I've talked to in the world.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
Drew's point is actually a valid one. He's not telling them to innovate in making a completely new kernel, he's telling them to make something that copies Linux but as Rust. He's basically telling them to do what Rustaceans keep saying they want anyway, rewrite it in Rust. The other complaint that some of the kernel developers have had is also a valid one. They expect kernel developers to take time out of their busy schedules to help the Rustaceans essentially replace the kernel developers. The point about documentation is a valid one, even if I disagree that the kernel isn't well documented and ultimately irrelevant in light of the demands placed on the developers. Lina's complaint about object lifetimes basically boils down to, "the documentation doesn't tell me (which I still doubt) and I can't read the code (which I fully expect from someone that doesn't really know how to program)". If you don't know the language you're attempting to rewrite, then how the hell do you think you can rewrite it. Again, Drew's point comes to mind, attempt to replicate Linux using Rust, don't attempt a novel solution, and move forward from there. If they can't even do that, then they don't understand the kernel enough to contribute. I doubt anyone's programming chops when they bitch about code in the kernel having these supposed bugs with no link to a test replicating them. It sounds more like they're doing things wrong and then blaming the kernel developers. It's not on them to teach you how to write correct code.
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
I mix hyphens and underscores in file names. I don't care about Windows users either or if they'll have problems with my filenames. Though I do try to keep to just lowercase because it's easier for me to type. However, there are always exceptions for me on that front, such as one I saw you have, AppImages, and my main folders in home which are still default names. On dates, my default screenshot name uses hyphens for the date and underscores for the time, though I'm perfectly fine with using colon as a time separator, and also setting a variable in bash with the date will only partially work. For instance, same day usage of a terminal window will correctly report the date, but if you keep the window open past midnight it'll still yield the previous date. A solution, which will only work from the terminal and not in shell scripts is to alias the date command and use `alias_in_question` as part of a filename. If using a shell script it would be helpful to use ~/.bash_aliases and just source it for scripts as well. Let's say you do:
alias T='date +"%H:%M:%S"' ; touch foo_bar-baz\:\:`T`; # and that'll work.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
Rust won't prevent all errors and triggers errors on code that would otherwise work 100% perfectly fine. It's training wheels for newbies, but no one who wants the language to get out of the way so they can do real work should use it. If you write your code in a way similar to how Rust wants you to write your code then literally any language would work equally as "safely", except that most others will let you get on with the task of actually writing the code. If you have to integrate with anything closed source, and I know Rust hates closed source, but you introduce a possible security hole and if you're writing real code you're going to use someone else's libraries instead of implementing everything from scratch yourself. If you want to write code that's safe, using a library written in an older language, and which has been debugged for decades, will give you the best path to success. Also, from a purely aesthetic point of view, Rust is uglier than C++, and from a usability point of view it's far, far slower to compile which makes iterative design harder to do.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
The one thing I didn't like about the first Crouching Tiger is how it ended. It just made me so sad. Up until that certain point where it turned, it was a great movie. On a happier thought, I eat eggs at least 5 times a week, whether for breakfast, lunch or dinner. I don't think I could pick a favorite, but over easy and in a sandwich are the two ways I eat the most. Scrambled comes in a very close third, with cheese and spices, sometimes mushrooms, often meat of some kind, occasionally in a burrito with salsa and sour cream. If you use salsa, it's got to be both green and red.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@AwesomeHairo It's, valid, in, English, to, use, a, comma, after, every, word. It's, better, not, to, but, there's, nothing, wrong, with, using, more, commas, than, you, need.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@unformed I can't really help with the games because they either do or they don't and it depends on the types of games you play. Granted you could run them through a VM and they'd be 100% compatible, but then you'd still be running Windows, and it'd be an extra layer which, depending on your machine, may slow things down unacceptably. I'll have to look into flowlauncher to even attempt helping with that, because I've never heard of it.
As for screenshots I use Spectacle and I'm not sure what feature you want that it may be missing. I've got all the shortcuts set up to screenshot the whole desktop, the active window and even to let me draw a rectangle on screen and screenshot that. It can save with a patterned filename, which I setup in the configuration as a time/date stamp, or you can save as whatever filename you want. It can be configured to save to any folder or choose a different one on demand. For me, I set the PrintScreen key to just bring up the window so I can do whatever from there, then WinKey+PrintScreen snaps the whole desktop, Win+Shift+PrtScr for the active window and Win+Ctrl+PrtScr for a rectangle region, but these are just the keys I use.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Since the time I started with Linux the recommendation has always been to setup a separate partition, and being rather old school I've always complied. I've only got 12gb of RAM, though I wanted a more rounded number, so I setup a 32gb swap partition. I think the most I ever saw it get used was 6gb, but that was fairly heavy use with about 20 browser windows, each with about 10 tabs apiece and a media player in the background with some music going, and obviously about 20 terminal windows across 5 desktops, plus an emulator. Usual day to day usage is maybe 5 browser windows at 20 to 30 tabs total and 8 terminals, and even then it's usually not more than 2gb of swap used.
If that constitutes a profile in which I've severely over-allocated my swap space, I'd still do it just the same. I've got the disk space and I've never felt it get sluggish. Even on the old computer, when I had 256mb of RAM and a 1gb swap partition, Slackware still felt snappy.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Personally, I would require that the name representation was always lowercase anyway, even on initialization. As for fun with operators, I like to overload / on strings in languages that don't already do so to act as the split operation. Say you've got a string that's s = "foo,bar,baz,luhrmann"; then a = s / ','; would yield an array of strings containing ["foo", "bar", "baz", "luhrmann"].
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
This is one of those few things that Pascal actually did better than C. In fact I opted to copy that for my own language, := to assign, = to compare shallow, and == to compare deep. Well, copy and amend. As it turns out, I do assign variables at times in condition headers, and it would be quite annoying to give up that ability or make it a warning/error. The solutions that people come up with often make no sense. Like in Java, "gee, using goto is problematic if you don't know what you're doing", "we'll just delete it from the language and it'll be fine." Turns out that sometimes your code looks worse without it and is even more spaghetti-fied. The same could be said for Yoda notation which wouldn't catch if ( a = b ) errors, if it's not intentional.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
My take, not that anyone will read it, but I still wish a new OS would crop up that combined the best aspects of both Windows and Linux. If someone were to read this I'm sure they'd disagree, but I think a lot of the original API design choices that Microsoft made were actually closer to good than Linux is even now. Even with source code in hand, I'd prefer that everything wasn't fully exposed to running programs. And I think the idea of having the GUI components implemented as part of the base OS API is a way better design, for so many reasons. However, some of the design choices of Linux were definitely better than Windows. Chief amongst those being the kernel separated from the majority of running components which allows the GUI to crash and not kill the whole OS. For that matter, I'm sure someone would want to remind me that Linux isn't an OS, but a kernel, and I'd say that's an irrelevant point because I want more of a base than just a kernel provides. And finally, if I ever get free time I may have to write it myself because surely no one else would.
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Maximilian1990 I just don't think they understand anything at all. Or they're just douchebag criminals with no morals. If someone can't afford a luxury item such as a video game, then the obvious answer is to just not play it. There are so many free games out there that are great games that I can't understand their mindset at all. I refuse to buy any game that is only sold through storefronts like Steam that take 30% for doing nothing more than serve files, but I don't pirate the games, and I would never use my objection to their outrageous cut as a reason to pirate.
The only clarification I would ask of you, is how do you feel about emulation in general? I feel that if someone buys the game, then they should be able to play it wherever and whenever, regardless of what Nintendo or any other company says, and towards that end, any game that requires emulation for me to play it I will buy a copy of it, whether I own or choose to use the platform that it was targeted at.
If someone lives in a third world country, as insulting as such a term is, then they'd do better to use their spare time to learn a skill and move to a better country. Although, even people in such countries can live opulent lifestyles because the standard of living through most of the world is far better than they are willing to admit. If someone has a computer that can play the latest and greatest games and lives in a developing nation, then they're a filthy liar if they expect me to believe that piracy was their only choice. Anyone justifying such blatant theft should be ashamed of themselves, but that would require morals and they probably don't have them.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
All of the issues highlighted are why a language should be designed from the ground up to handle all of these things. Instead, they copied Java, which was highly constrained and foolishly so, and extended it with incompatible features from C++, and have had to continuously extend the language to add features that are hacked on to keep up with where developers want to go. So now, we have hot garbage on toast for pretty much every language, because of course, Java, C++ and many more have hacked on kludges to try and keep up. Not that I'm saying a new language should be designed and built every few years to keep up, but maybe we shouldn't try to keep up at all. C is still perfectly fine as a language, it just doesn't have syntactic sugar to handle everything, but it also doesn't have huge quantities of gotchas that make programming anything complex a minefield.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
As a programmer this is one of the things that bothers me when coming up with names for functions. Since I mostly use C, I tend towards an OVS ordering, but when I write C++ I prefer SV with no need to describe O as it's implicit. However, there are times when I need two O's or two S's and that can really complicate the naming conventions. For instance, say I have an arbitrary precision integer type that I simply named Integer, capital 'i', and I have a string type named String, and let's say that I wish to concatenate two subjects of each type of object. Obviously requiring either type to have a dependency on the other is a no go, but how then does one word it, StringAppendInteger or IntegerAppendString, and what order should they go in when calling the functions. This is obviously a simplistic example, but other more complex ones exist.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I don't know if it's just me, but Odin fails to build straight from the repository. I tried checking out prior tags to no avail. I suspect my clang/LLVM installation is out of date, but I'm not updating since it works now and updating always breaks things for me. This is the eternal problem I keep having with new languages, they refuse to build out of the box unless you have the exact same system they expect or the latest and greatest library versions or stand on one leg and cluck like a chicken. Zig at least provides a pre-built binary that runs, even if the language is half-baked and not completed, and Rust as ginormous as it is actually built from source, which is a first for me, but none of the nightly builds for Odin will even run because even my libffi is out of date. Is it too much to ask that compiler authors try to remember that all they're doing is converting source into a binary format and it doesn't require the latest and greatest of everything to do that. Hell, I'm not even finished with my own language, but every version compiled for every system I tested it on without the need to update anything and still generated code which ran. Except for the Pi version, which generated a binary that ran, but not on the Pi itself, because I haven't written the ARM code generator yet.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The problem with nearly all modern boycotts is 7 billion people. The reason why some work is because for those companies that they work on, they have an incredibly limited audience for their product or service. When you only market to people that are against the message you're trying to put out, you will fail. However, with video games and most products in general, it's insanely easy to market to a far wider audience, even say globally. If you're charging $70 for your product and you find even a quarter of a million dinguses to buy it, you'll be sitting pretty high on the hog. Again, 7 billion people, regardless of how many have a computer or any console and even want to play a video game, that's a huge pool of potential customers. For most things, boycotts may never work again. Let's just hope that some continue to work and it balances out.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
If you want to understand why no one would push to maintain it, it's because Python as a language, whether 2 or 3, sucks. The changes in 3 are enough of an improvement and still similar enough in working that not many have problems updating code. Most of the problems really are with print, which is just F'd up. As for what you said about DOS, before my mom retired she worked for a company that still used DOS programs for their call center functionality. The company my dad worked for before he retired used DOS programs for their invoicing and shipping. The reasoning, as I understand it is, why pay to replace what still works. Sure, you could wind up with something better, and it might save you money in the long term, but the way industry keeps degrading as time goes on makes it far more likely that you'd wind up with something worse that would cost you way more money and you'd have to just go back to the old software anyway.
3
-
3
-
I personally dislike RISC architectures, but the competition is great and they are innovating more on product lines. So I'll use them, but I would prefer if a new platform would rise up to compete with both and be a more unified architecture. One of the reasons I like CISC better is because you can really pack instructions in the cache a lot better and it does have a noticeable speed increase on your system. Speed testing also proves that as they add more extensions the speed suffers when mixing modes a lot. That's why a lot of ARM devices still haven't fully gone 64-bit, and it's annoying as heck. If a new CISC architecture cropped up with 8 to 64 bit instructions baked in from the start, it would kill everything else. For that matter, I'd love to see the FPU be more integrated and work more similarly to the ALU. More registers, wider variety of sizes, and all usable whether we're talking about multimedia instructions or floating point. No more duality, and just be 64-bit on startup. It'd require a lot to get it going, but any of the larger chip makers could do it, if they had the testicular fortitude. No one will read this far, if they read this at all, but I'm sure people will disagree with this vehemently for one reason or another, if they respond at all.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I would say the reason to use a terminal file manager is because you can do everything that a GUI file manager can do, but you can use more keyboard shortcuts which is something a terminal user tends to like to do more. Along with the fact that you don't need to type a full file name out so you can very accurately select and delete/rename/move a file whereas from the terminal proper you'd have to either type it out fully or tab complete through potentially dozens of similarly named files. Now, from my shell I've got readline setup so I can hit tab, complete to the first match, then shift+tab to go back to the common root, type a few more characters then tab for more, wash, rinse, repeat as needed, but in some directories, usually things downloaded from others, it can be annoying. Especially if we're dealing with varying cases of file names.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Sabine, people don't click dislike instinctively because they dislike the subject matter, it's because your analysis of the data is flawed and you're reporting it as though it's sacrosanct. What's worse in this case you didn't even analyze the data and are just reporting what someone else came up with. The data simply doesn't support the conclusions being drawn. For starters, CO2 is heavier than air and sinks to ground level and isn't actually a global warmer. It cools the environment, and it's the primary growth factor for plants. For another thing, one of the key complaints that people like me have with the statements being made is the massively facile assumption of the unsaid portion of this argument, anthropogenic. There is no evidence that the changes that are occurring are in any way out of the norm of this planet's environmental cycles. Yet, the unspoken portion by climate scientists is just taken at face value as though it couldn't possibly be a false conclusion to draw based on the data. As for the models predicting the weather more accurately, let's see how they do with an actual 100 years of prediction. Every model I've seen breaks down past a week, and most break down past a couple of days. There is absolutely no way you can accurately predict 100 years into the future with the current models. It doesn't help that they often fail to consider the scale of the data that is needed to predict anything. The Earth is too big and the amount of data collected too small to make an accurate prediction. Also, we're not even close to being as hot as this planet has been in the past while still supporting plant and animal life. It's amazing how people that can't even maintain a terrarium for more than a decade think they can predict anything about where the climate is going, or what plant and animal life on this planet can take.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I hope you read this, but it is a skill issue because we've had static analyzers of all varieties for use with C and C++ for decades. Not using one to validate your code if it's going to be in a critical, as in life or death, device, that's a skill issue. Something to consider is that there are millions of fresh graduates out there who have no clue what they're doing and often get tasked with writing code, whether it be on the job training or just as an exercise in testing their skills, and without any critical thinking and proper analysis of what they've written, that code gets used in products that ship.
We've known how to write safe and secure code for decades, and yet people still write bad code because they are unskilled. Also, the 70% number you keep quoting was from a non-representative survey and should be ignored as a false data point. And in case you would like to point out that senior devs make mistakes and want to claim that the Rust compiler can somehow do what a more feature-filled decades old static analyzer can do, consider that maybe they shouldn't be called senior devs if they're not going to make use of the free and open source tools to properly check their C code, especially if they're writing code that is being incorporated into a kernel.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Personally, even though I hate Rust, I don't care if they want it in the kernel. I won't be building my own kernels in the future anyway, not unless I write one myself anyhow. The more I read the source code for the compiler and runtime, the more I realize that if someone pushes a Rust job my way I'd rather go hungry than use it. I've never liked the design, it's horribly inconsistent, keywords being at different levels of abbreviation in a way that pains me, and the Java-esque use of access modifiers. The absolutely idiotic choice regarding mutability. The way macros are used, the bastardization of goto, break 'label; is disgusting. The sometimes functional, sometimes imperative design. The way match works. All of these bad design decisions, and more, annoy me on an individual basis, but add up to hatred. However, all of these complaints are merely about personal taste, so feel free to not care.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
You probably won't read this even if YouTube doesn't delete it, but as someone who has been learning Rust over the past two or three years, I can tell you that it's not a good programming language. Every feature that they tout as being so much better than C was already in C++ and done with a better syntax. If you write idiomatic C++ then it'll be just as safe as Rust yet more performant than Rust. However, C++ makes it easier to write this code and is easier on the eyes. Constructors in Rust are basically constructors in Object Pascal, except it resembles Java a bit more because of the jagged usage of memory handling functionality. The thing that Rustaceans don't seem to get is that not every pointer should be a smart_ or shared_ ptr. Just like when C# first cropped up, I hated this weak garbage of forcing an unsafe keyword on the users just to use code that makes sense. One of the key problems with Rust is that they added with syntax while C++ added with more code. Yeah, there were some dumb additions over the years in C++ to solve problems that shouldn't have existed in the first place, but they were generally well placed additions. First few that come to mind in case anyone does see this and asks, r-value references, attributes, lambda captures and arrow returns.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
As time goes on, everything in the software industry gets more and more bloated. Even things written from scratch get that way. Take Rust for example, you download a gig or two that inflates as it gets built and builds other random projects and when all is said and done you've got 20gb of crap on your drive. Sure, you wouldn't distribute all of that for your program to work, and things you write in it won't need that much, but as a developer, you have to keep the equivalent of an entire operating system, and then some, around just to use a single language that isn't even very good. On the other hand, if you developed only C or C++, a system with a GUI can be installed that works well in 4gb or less, depending on how tight you want things, and you can get pretty dang tight with Linux.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
This is why the promise of Java drove so many programmers to use such a disgustingly verbose language. I must admit that targeting the JVM is enticing too, if you're writing a compiler. The thing I wonder, and I hope this gives you a video idea, is how does the JVM compare to WASM? Supposedly WASM is faster than JavaScript, but I've also heard that there are features that don't translate over. Since the JVM has basically only grown over the decades, I would think that would hinder WASM as a choice. Obviously, I wouldn't choose JavaScript as a target just because WASM lacks some features, but I might just choose the JVM. This might be confusing because Java and JavaScript are wildly different and incompatible languages, but they're both valid targets if you're writing a compiler since they both offer some level of easy platform agnosticism.
Side note, C would also be decent choice of targets if you make use of third party libraries that are portable, such as GTK, SDL or RayLib. However, that would also add a more developer-centric dependency that would hinder non-technical end users. Most people have a copy of the JVM installed, and nearly everyone has a browser with a JavaScript VM built-in, and those generally don't require them to do more than double click an icon or single click a link.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
If the government endorses it, then no one should touch it with a 100 foot pole. Since they denigrate C, that means it should be the only language anyone uses. I guess I'll just continue writing perfect code then. Of course, I run tests on my code with various static analyzers before it goes to production, and I have a debugger, though I've barely used it in the past 10 years. Although, I am fully willing to admit that I am unique, even if I hate that fact. It seems like everyone else has their brain screwed in the wrong way around these days, but especially any programmer that gets infected with Rust, Go and C#. I don't see such slavish pandering from developers using other languages. I am also fully willing to admit that people misunderstanding the reason for the situation we find ourselves in kind of make me a bit angry. It doesn't really help that even people with decades of experience can still act like total newbs because even they don't understand how the computer they're using actually works. I'm sure all of this will be dismissed as egocentric, but it's still correct, whether anyone wants to admit it. Not using available tools is a skill issue, and free and open source static analyzers that function far better than the Rust compiler has any hope of functioning do exist.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Clearly this audience won't be receptive to this message and it'll probably get censored by YT anyway. However, if the bans worked then there should have been 0 incidences of gun violence. Murders, which apparently weren't looked at on their own, should also have gone down with no associated acts of violence that didn't result in death in lieu of. Since you didn't even mention those, I can only assume you didn't study them, or if you did you either felt the numbers disagreed with your narrative or you erroneously felt they agreed with it and felt no need to mention them. Either way, suspicious. Violence in most civilized nations has gone down over the past 40 years, media reports of gun violence notwithstanding, but when you ban guns, the violence gets shifted to other forms. People still die, and while it is fewer deaths than with guns, the repercussions are longer lasting because they wind up disfigured or with a chronic health problem or just in general with PTSD. I'm not saying that people would be better off dead, what I am saying is that they'd be better off armed in the first place before they're attacked so they can fend off their attacker and prevent the situation resulting in their own death or maiming. Self defense is a human right, and the means by which you defend yourself are irrelevant as long as you are responsible. Dave of EEVblog brings up the point of a cricket bat, disregarding the fact that he would be charged with assault if he defended himself with said cricket bat, and it's disingenuous to say the least. Everyone touting gun control as though it would actually work needs to wake up to reality. Criminals won't obey the law, they'll either keep the guns they have, if they have them, or make new ones or buy them on the black market. In any event, the criminals who would assault you will still have access to firearms and they'll know you don't.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The only thing good about it is the concurrency because it uses BEAM. It's literally a less effective Rust. I wonder how long he had been working on it because I'm still not ready to release my language, but mine will have function overloading and allow using whatever Unicode characters you want. And I still take issue with the fake inference that modern languages have. let as a keyword to define an object, is just dumb. It's basically a weaker version of the auto keyword in C++ because now you're asking for permission. In my language you can infer by just doing foo := bar; The only reason for the : notation in setting a value in my language is to tell the compiler to create something there. It's just a way of catching mistakes, so you won't be likely to do foo = bar; and later baz = foO; and get a value or error you don't expect. It also works as a conditional guard so you don't accidentally set the value in a conditional.
I also take issue with the import systems for every modern language, even C++. If I'm importing a library I expect it to be immediately accessible. So import io; and everything in the io subsection of the library is accessible, but you can also do import io as io; and keep it in its own namespace or import io as fluffernutter; if you want. I also took the approach of inferring meaning in cases where the context tells me what you're referring to, such as enum Color { Red, Green, Blue }; Color c = Green; instead of requiring Color:Green to explicitly get at the namespace, though you can still be explicit if you want.
I did the same for switch. switch c { Red: foo(); break; Green { bar(); baz(); } Blue { print( "Green doesn't fall through because it enclosed the case in braces.\n Red does fall through because it designates a section.\n" ); } }. I also avoided the Java style keyword duplication by allowing a modifier to enclose a block or start a section. So say you want to make a group of functions public, just do public: and everything until the next section is public, and you can stack them. I still don't understand why everyone wants to copy Java and JavaScript for function syntax. No need for a keyword, just use a regular pattern.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I feel like you're trying to trigger me by equating C and C++. They haven't been equivalent for at least 26 or 27 years now, depending on which standard you work from. I would consider C++98 to be the great split, but some others would say C99. If you knew C++, you'd realize that Rust is an attempt to replace it, not C. You could still go your entire career using only one language, and there are many, many candidates for that position. However, why would you want to when using multiple languages is so much more fun. While I've mostly used C in my career, I've done a lot of C++ and assembly, and a few other languages.
I'm hoping that in this field I'm not unique in this regard, but I enjoy learning new things. I've been learning Rust for the last 3 or 4 years now, and I've also been working on learning at least a dozen others. Aside from learning new languages I've been trying to keep up with new developments in the languages I already knew. And on top of all of that, I've written various C compilers for work before and have been working on a language of my own design as a personal project for a long while now. I don't think that we, as developers, should stick to only one language, and I wouldn't consider such a focus healthy for our well-being.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@HandGrenadeDivision Intent means a lot, but the most important thing is whether or not the person targeted takes offense. If you call me a slur, and I take no offense, then none was given even if intended. In other words, if you lob a ball at me and I dodge it, it doesn't hurt me. It doesn't absolve you of wrongdoing, as an attempt is nearly as bad as a success, but if I ignore it and you give up, then I've won better than if I lob a ball right back at you. There's a book that some people have read which gives guidance on this issue. Has a message about turning away or something, and in extreme circumstances, as in you refuse to back down, then retaliate, and only then. At least if I'm interpreting the message correctly.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I actually disagree with most of these, but especially number 3. If we're talking about a C-based language, or even Pascal or BASIC, then they'll be largely the same and easy to pick up. However, there are many languages that have weird eccentricities and you can't merely pick them up at a glance. Take for instance bash scripting, where if you've only ever learned one of the most common languages you still won't have a clue what the majority of constructs are doing in certain bash scripts. I would go so far as to say that to really be a well rounded developer, there are certain classes of languages that you should pick up: any assembly, though one that's either useful or fun would be the best choice, such as 6502 for fun; any C-like, but preferably C itself with a continuation into C++; any LISP; a shell scripting language, but preferably bash; JavaScript; any functional language, and most would suggest Haskell, though I've always kind of preferred OCaml.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I doubt anyone will see this, but recursion is always unnecessary and should never be used. People keep bringing up tail recursion but not every algorithm can be written that way and if it can, it's just as easy to write and understand as simple iteration. If the iterative and recursive solutions are written correctly and they indeed yield the same result, the iterative solution will never crash due to any internal influences while it's possible that the recursive solution will, regardless of embedded system or desktop computer. This is because the stack is still limited in size even on desktops. If a developer can't translate a recursive algorithm into an iterative implementation, then they likely aren't very good anyway. One of the examples I keep seeing is for Fibonacci numbers, but I think the better example would be Quick Sort. If you've ever implemented one the correct way, you'll understand what I'm talking about, and even if you haven't, you might understand it should you read any C standard library implementation of it. You can have a simple solution that generally works, or a correct one, and you can have a complicated iterative implementation or a complex one. In the end, it's down to the programmer's skill.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@anonymoususer3561 You, may, not, like, that, it, is, a, valid, construction, in, the, English, language, but, it, really, is.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
It amazes me how many people don't understand what was stated, or the situation as it actually is. They're not closing the source of Linux the kernel, nor could they even if they wanted to. They won't be violating the terms of the GPL as they own the copyright to all the code they've produced and can change the license at any time. The GPL is only viral for third parties. People keep saying copyleft as though it's a legal term. It is not. If I write a piece of software and place it under the GPL, you can come along and make changes, but your changes must be open sourced. I can't incorporate your changes into my code without then contaminating my own copyright on the code, but if I ignore your changes, then I retain all of my rights to the code I've written and can then change the license to something proprietary and closed source, if I so desire. Of course, no one will read this, let alone the people in the comments section who need to read it, but whatever, here it is in case a miracle happens.
2
-
2
-
2
-
While I wish someone would stop the generative content companies, generation being in competition with creation, I think the time to do so was 20 years ago, or more. I won't call it "AI" because I reserve that term for things that are actually intelligent. I think our copyright laws have become overly corrupt and been used as a cudgel to block anything and everything, and we should go back to having copyrights expire at 14 years, with the only caveat being that the countdown starts once the thing in question becomes popular, which would satisfy many small creators. However, that said, I don't care about the artists at all because most are immoral douchebags who would gladly murder me, or enjoy watching me die, just for the audacity of having morals. If they lose income over this and have to transition to a hard labor job, then so be it. The world would probably be a better place if everyone had to perform at least some hard labor in their life. Of course, it may be too late as the pieces are coming together to allow lone individuals to destroy the world using NN-based technology to control drones and recognize human shapes.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I'll say this here because I know no one will read it, but privacy is a human right. Private ownership is a human right. The right to live is a human right. The right to work without your effort being stolen by corrupt pieces of shit who waste it on studies of the mating habits of ground squirrels is a human right. Okay, that last one got a tad specific, but it still pisses me off that my tax dollars are wasted on such garbage and I can't ask for a refund for what I never asked for in the first place from people who stole my money and wasted it. Taxation is theft, and when it's acceptable is when it's actually used for the greater good and not as a punishment for living. The money I earn gets taxed just for it being income, then if I invest it the interest is taxed, and if I buy something with it that is taxed, and if I sell it that is taxed and if I try to give it to my children when I die it gets taxed. If it's land and it's just sitting there it gets taxed, and if I want to build a house on it it has to be approved by some government stooge, and if I ignore them they'll tear it down at my expense and maybe steal the land from me too. I'm sick of it, and our forefathers would be ashamed that we continue to let this theft grow so out of control.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Completely disagree with regards to Google vs Oracle. The chief reasons being that A) Sun opened the source for the JDK and JVM before Oracle bought Java from them, and B) Oracle didn't even create Java, they bought it from Sun, and of course C) Google didn't copy any code to make their runtime, nor did they call it Java. It has already been established with prior court precedents that you can't copyright an API. Furthermore, logically and morally speaking, copyrights, patents and trademarks should not be transferable. As for Nintendo's insecurities, I always referred to the NES as a Nintendo and the SNES as a Super Nintendo. They should've just embraced that, but they're a shit company anyway so fuck 'em. I really don't know why I bother wasting my time commenting because YouTube either deletes or shadows a good 85% of my comments, and the ones that stick just about never get read anyway.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Press keys, the window manager accepts them and passes them along to the application with focus, if they're relevant. Press a global shortcut and the WM would handle it and send them nowhere else. No apps in focus, as in none open on a given desktop/workspace, then ignore them. No need for a keylogger being a security risk because it need not work if the OS properly segments input from what processes it. That's the solution, now whether anyone does it with what already exists or starts a new project is up to them, I guess. And if you're thinking about global shortcuts for common tasks, like ctrl+c to copy and ctrl+v to paste, message passing is the solution. A program sets up a message queue and gets input that way instead of needing to process keys directly itself, but that'd be more like how Windows works (or worked?, I haven't used it in 20 years and don't know if it still does). The GUI library could provide functionality like edit controls where keys could be requested directly.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Not that you'll read this, but I'd actually prefer we just stick with the old works-everywhere formats. PNG's and JPEG's were good enough and if you're using an older computer you probably can't update it to use the newer format because you can't update either your hardware or your software. As it turns out for me, I can't open AVIF except through the browser and AV1 encoded video plays like a slideshow. I have a few means for converting WEB/P, but it's awkward to deal with and I can't really browse my local files if they're encoded that way.
However, there are two points that need correcting. The first is that JPEG doesn't have a lossless option, because it actually does and was added to the standard back in 1993. Most tools can't work with it, but nevertheless it does exist in the standard. The second is that PNG's don't have compression because they most certainly do. I can only conclude that you meant that in a different way. If you meant to say lossy, well, there are compressors that allow you to have lossy compression with PNG files, such as `pngquant`. There are others, but it seems to be the best at it as far as I'm concerned. If you meant something else I can't think of what.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Ligands23 If everyone decided to leave Windows en masse, then they could effect real change in the industry and either Microsoft would slightly change their evil ways to retain customers or they'd die. And if you really feel it's necessary to pay someone for the OS you use, whether you realize you're doing it or not you certainly are paying for Windows, then you could find a developer working on some open source project and donate a dollar as well as convince all your friends to do the same. If just 0.0014% of the population of the planet donated a dollar, 1 or 2 developers could be paid for an entire year of development time, depending on how much they spend to live. Don't like something about it? Pay someone to bend it to your whims.
If anyone bothers to ask, there are companies that actively pay developers to work on open source projects, even the kernel itself has developers that are paid just to develop for the kernel. While most developers donate their time, they'd have a lot more of it to devote towards open source development if people donated money. A lot of people complain about the user interface of various programs, but if there's no one being paid to work on it and the people who are working on a project are focused on making the core functionality work, how can you expect it to get done.
In short, donate to open source and it'll get better.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I'm going to have to disagree that Linux wouldn't be as big a thing as it is now if not for GNU. I think the opposite is true and that if it weren't for GNU and the GPL, and of course people's aversion to the GPL, that the whole of the industry and Linux itself would have been better off. I think Linux would've become a much bigger deal, albeit with a lot more paid options, and more people would use it worldwide. It's not as if open source didn't exist before GNU, because it most certainly did, and it's not like they made it more popular, because the GPL. The only real credit that GNU deserves is in holding Linux back. Look at Android, they hated the GPL so much that they had to rewrite a lot of code which they shouldn't have needed to do, just to avoid it, and they're working on replacing Linux as their kernel instead of contributing back to it, despite the fact that the GPL isn't a factor there. What GNU has done is infect a lot of people with a mind virus and squelched not just Linux, but the software industry at large. Of course I know I'm in the minority on this thought.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@piccoloatburgerking It's like I'm talking to a child queen who thinks that "off with their heads" is the appropriate response to anyone saying something you don't like. In the end that queen goes kicking and screaming to her own beheading because she was too narrow minded to understand that others have different viewpoints. Try to imagine, this person, whoever they are, they hate someone merely for how they were born. Instead of trying to correct them, you imprison them, and yes, taking away their right to speak is imprisonment. They get angry at the entire world. At the people who imprison them for having done so, but at everyone else for allowing it to happen. They can't tell you that they're going to do anything after that because you've prevented them from talking, so when they come back with a gun, a knife or even just a fist, you have no warning and wind up dead along with 50 others. The whole time until it happens you're thinking you've done a good thing in depriving someone of their rights just for saying something you disagree with, an action which is an emotional response, by the way.
Or you could stop and think for one second and realize it'd be better to counter their speech with your own and perhaps reform them.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@RustIsWinning There's always the original, Lint. Then you've got the compilers themselves. Or Splint, Yasca, Infer Static Analyzer, Moose, Sparse if you're working with the kernel, Frama-C, CppCheck, Coccinelle, SourceTrail, CppLint, PMD, Blast, CPAChecker and SonarQube. Those are just the open source ones and that target C and/or C++. There are more for other languages and more that are closed source. Granted, this is just what I found in a 5 minute search because I haven't needed to use anything more than the compiler to check my code in about 15 years now. I hardly ever make any typos, and those that I make are very easily spotted by the compiler and corrected in 1 second. Of course, you likely won't see this.
2
-
I don't know why kids these days have to come up with terms or phrases to label everything different and/or contrary to what it's always been called. However, if someone shows up to do the job and actually does it well, and puts in 100% effort while at work doing the job, then that's all a boss can and should expect, but if they put in less effort, then it's not doing the job, it's halfassery, and definitely a cause for firing, at least in my book. Being paid for the hours you're at work and no more, that's just fair, and not being pushed to be at work more hours than you're paid for is fair, but actually do the job.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@grumpyjohnny6982 Every politician who not only pushed for lockdowns but kept pushing during the entire time they kept them up. If someone pushed at the start based on a good faith notion that they weren't being manipulated and misled, then changed their mind later when they realized the truth, obviously they shouldn't be punished, but definitely those that kept pushing should. Every doctor and nurse who forced people to wear masks, knowing full well that they were useless from the start, every single one, should lose their license and see prison time. Those that kept loved ones apart in hospitals, especially as loved ones lay dying and unable to receive comfort on their death beds, they should get an even more severe punishment. All of the neighbors, friends and family who ratted people out or pushed this crap, they at least deserve a fine, if not prison time. Those people are all either evil or stupid.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I recently watched the movie, The Hunt, and after seeing it I decided to read some reviews. One person said that 100% of the country is sure that 50% of the country is insane. Their premise being that it's not true, that only a few fringe elements are insane. However, that's just wrong, and how we can be sure of that is that a large proportion of our population actually believes in these stupid ideologies. If you believe that a baby which isn't fully formed is nothing more than a clump of cells, then you are insane. If you believe that a child is mature enough to make important life altering and permanent decisions about the integrity of their own bodies, then you are insane. If you believe that a man can become a woman by chopping up their genitals and taking hormones, then you are insane. If you believe that free speech and the right to protect yourself only exist for certain people and not everyone, then you are insane. There is no middle ground on these issues. These are purely black and white issues that if you're on the wrong side of them, and it seems a major part of the population are, then you are simply wrong.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@robonator2945 First, their servers are paid for by advertisers that only advertise with them because of content. Content creators earn them money, so their business model is one that they have created a public platform so that can happen. Second, I'm not in any way suggesting that the government control what they do, but rather prevent them from doing things that are wrong. Certainly you wouldn't say it's government overreach to prevent people from murdering. So why would you consider it government overreach to prevent people from suppressing others' rights in other ways? Third, does a person actually have the right to suppress others' rights when they're on private land? I would argue no. If you invite someone on to your property and decide you don't want them there, you ask them to leave, you don't shoot them in the head and yell at their corpse that you no longer want them there. If a guest says something you don't like, the same rule applies, you ask them to leave, you don't shoot them dead and say you hated what they were saying.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I'm sure that 99% of developers will never get what I mean by this, but this is why you use toolkits.
No one should care, or even need to care, about X or Wayland or low level primitives of the GPU, unless you're writing a game. A text editor, no matter how complex it is, shouldn't require this level of optimization, and if they weren't writing everything from scratch and doing the GPU acceleration by hand, they wouldn't have to worry about these issues. This has been, and will continue to be, my biggest complaint with regards to the rewrite everything crowd. Of course, if they were writing the toolkit, then this behavior could be overlooked because they'd need to deal with the complexity, but game developers have already solved these optimizations and if they knew anything about game development then they'd not be looking at it and going, "what is happening here".
Maybe you think this is too harsh. After all, it has taken years of learning for me to understand everything that I do and they're probably in their 20's, but it goes along with what I've been saying over and over again about not reinventing the wheel.
DRY code is better than WET code.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@robertsmith2956 Given how the technology works, it'd be hard to get a real consensus on who is responsible for any of the answers it gives. Some people claim the answers are completely generated, but it's really a matter of training. The data it's trained on isn't always given proper vetting, how could it be with the entire internet as its corpus, but accuracy is a problem. If you read up on how neural networks actually work, and learn just how far back the history goes, you might be surprised that it's taken this long to get even to the point we're at.
As for leftists arguing nonsense in court, yeah, that's their way of life, arguing nonsense. In court or on the street corner, they're going to spew nonsense. I'm inclined to conclude that we're approaching the end times.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@AlucardNoir The sad thing is, most software that runs exclusively on Windows could be ported with ease, even really huge and complex programs that use lots of Win32 API functions. It's true that they don't see money or utility in porting to Linux, as @ErazerPT says, but that's mostly because they actually are evil. Adobe has contracts to fulfill and if they were more portable they'd not only violate contracts with the big OS vendors. They'd also invalidate all of their bullshit excuses over the past 30 years and would definitely cause a mass exodus, not just from Windows and Mac, but from Adobe as well. There's really nothing special about most software that people use, just tiny little quibbles that they can't see past to use alternatives. It took a lot of getting use to not having Visual Studio when I first switched to Linux, but Vim and a decent config for it makes the experience nearly the same. Although, I will admit that as this was 20+ years ago, as that may flavor someone's view on it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@toby9999 I don't think you know what a strawman argument is if you think that is one. However, for the sake of argument, let's assume that open source projects only approach 30% of the functionality of closed source projects, which is a complete BS argument because they're much better than that, but in that event you also have the option of using WINE. If you want to argue that the base functionality of the OS is inferior to Windows, then I'll know you're arguing in bad faith because only a zombie could believe that. And yes, their behavior is in fact evil because they could still make profit without screwing over customers. Their behavior is that of a parasite, squeezing as much blood from you as they can. All of that said, I'd still argue that open source is superior because I don't believe for one second that the functionality equivalency is anywhere near that imbalanced and if it's as close as I'm estimating then the reason OSS wins is because you can modify the code to add features yourself. Since you bring up MSVS, I'm going to assume you're a programmer, and that means you could do so too, assuming yet again competency.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I think that maybe some people missed your overall point, which is a very valid point that applies no matter what language the project was written in or what language they want to move the project to.
For my own perspective on this constant RIIR mentality, I've found nearly universally that when rewrites happen, features are lost. Even if the program runs faster, if it does less, as the user of that program I don't care if it's now viewed as a "safer" program. Of course, as anyone who knows more than one systems language can tell you, there's more than one way to skin a cat and Rust isn't any safer than other languages, even C. There are plenty of tools to do analysis of your code and keep your program error free that are far better than the Rust compiler and target languages like C. You can write high quality code in nearly any language, it's just a matter of skill. One could claim all they want that "Rust forces you to do things a certain way", but if you already write your code in that way then you shouldn't have problems with C, and if you don't already write your code that way then you were using C wrongly anyhow. If you didn't already know how to correctly write code, then you probably shouldn't have been a programmer in the first place, or you should just use JavaScript.
As for the comments on async, I have always believed it's the wrong solution for the problem at hand. It's an attempt to merge the concept of a coroutine with threads and make them take less effort than threads, but it's still just threads with you having less control over what happens. True coroutines don't require separate threads, but the concept has been bastardized by everyone who keeps incorporating async garbage into languages. I look at them as being unnecessary work because it's better overall to just use the OOP method of saving state in memory somewhere, maybe even on the stack, and then just calling a function to update that state, which is more or less the generator concept. Consider that C already has that in its standard library with FILE's, where you can read some input or write some output and it's buffered. If you really want to read input in the background, then just use a separate thread, which even C has in its standard library now too.
Although, I doubt anyone will read all of this, and it's most likely that someone will see this last line and comment that they read the whole post when they didn't.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
100% agree that most movies should not be remade, as well as the Planet of the Apes remakes, the recent ones anyway, are so much better than the originals. As far as sequels are concerned, when I was younger I felt like the second movie of nearly every trilogy from the 70's, 80's, 90's and 00's were the best of the trilogy. I don't generally feel that way as much as I used to, but for instance, seeing the TMNT movies when I was younger I liked the second more than the others but as I matured I found that the third was actually the best of that trilogy, only barely edging out the first. Granted, I'm still immature, but I do have different tastes from when I was in my 20's. I even enjoy eating jalapeños.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Something that not many people think about is that you don't need to register with any central authority to install Linux. You can install it on any device you want and no one need know. What's the market share in the server space? Somewhere in the 90-99% range? How many cell phones run Android? Forget GNU, it's irrelevant as you don't need it to have a working Linux install, but consider how many computers your average Linux user will have and most, if not all, will have it installed. So forgetting market share, solely for the sake of argument, most "normies" are lazy and if it's not installed by default, as in a pre-built, then most won't use it. What's more is most people are unwilling to find alternative programs for the things they use on a daily basis. Once people are used to things, they don't want to switch. Here I am 20 plus years later and I'm still using vim, but mostly because I can't figure out how to exit.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The sorry state that our world is in depresses me. Instead of Mac, Windows or Google, the choice should be amongst the plethora of Linux distributions that are nearly all open source and free to use and modify. For that matter, it shouldn't be a case of durability either because children should be taught to respect their belongings, if not by their parents then by the schools, and shouldn't abuse them. You can say it's impossible, but when I was a kid nearly everyone was taught this lesson and things were not so carelessly broken as they are now. Sure, accidents happened, but they really were accidents then and it was so infrequent as to not be a cause for concern. And as far as software is concerned, there are enough free and open source alternatives to the paid junk that the big three provide that no kid should be learning on one of the big three at all. The way the modern world and the internet works these days, if I get any responses they'll all be negative because people with positive responses don't chime in.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I find it interesting that the bugs they fixed were all relatively easy to fix, especially if you look at the code, but also they're the kind of bugs that should not have existed in the first place regardless of fuzz testing, but more extensively that you'd have to actually be malicious to make use of them, and for that matter that anyone is still fixing any bugs in X. It's kind of amazing too, how easy it was to follow along with this video because of how cleanly the code is laid out. I didn't already have a copy of the source for libXpm, and annoyingly it had some configuration that only happened when you `make`'d it, but once that was done it was super easy to trace through it by hand. The majority of problems occur in inner functions that the user can't access and are a direct result of not fully checking input before calling them. Also, ParseComment() still has a bug where it doesn't compare the characters read so far against the buffer's maximum size, which if you look in the generated header, XpmI.h, is set to BUFSIZ. There may be more, but that one was within the first 20 lines of the function. Also also, `git blame` is such a cool tool.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yeah, I see the death cults all over the internet. People advocating for the murder of children all the time in an almost ritualistic fashion. It's really rather sickening. But I can't say as though I've seen a ton of misogyny on the internet. A bit of it here and there, sure, but not even enough to be a whelming amount, let alone overwhelming. I can, however, say that I've seen an extremely overwhelming amount of misandry on the internet. Some even explicitly calling for the death of men for even so much as complimenting a woman. Those are some scary people, let me tell you. I've also seen a lot of men backing these women up, often at the expense of sanity, and all for the vaguest hint of a possibility that they may get in their pants. Which one you ask? Well, any of them. These men that defend misandry often don't care because they're so desperate that they'll do or say anything just for that tinge of hope.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vladlu6362 Uh huh, sure. So when you're forced to check for an error you know won't happen, which will make your code slower, the errno method means you don't have to check and your code can run faster. In a critical inner loop that matters. You might need to check for debug code, but Rust will make you check always unless you write a lot more garbage. So either easier to use when you know what you're doing, or harder to use because that's "safe", despite it not actually protecting you from every error. If that's too much for your tiny brain, let's simplify it: C method safer and cleaner, Rust method not safer, not cleaner, more annoying.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Oh yeah, tech literacy is a huge problem these days, even amongst my fellow techies it can be. People declaring that ChatGPT is AI forgetting that the I means intelligence, being a prime example of such. You're right that people are willfully ignorant now because 60 years is definitely enough, if you ask me, and computers haven't really changed that much in the past two decades. Yeah, faster, more RAM, more storage, blah blah, but basically the same as they were 20 years ago. Most of us even still use x86-based computers and for those that only know crappy ARM devices they generally have no clue how that computer in their pocket actually works and they don't care. Apple's "what is a computer" ad tells you all you need to know about modern humans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
While I can agree a crime has occurred, what that crime is, is where we disagree. I believe the only crime the guilty party should be charged with, if it wasn't her, is vandalism. The hate crime designation only stirs up more racial tensions and makes things worse, but more than that, it's an infringement on our right to free speech. While I disagree with the sentiment of the message, I believe they have every right to express it as long as it's not through the medium of vandalism. If they made an online post or yelled it into a megaphone, then they'd be a shithead, but I'd argue that it's their right to tell the world what a dick they are. If on the other hand it comes out that she's committing fraud by claiming a crime has occurred that hasn't, then she should be charged with that, which would be wholly different from vandalism, since it's her own property, or that of a hate crime, which is a designation that shouldn't exist.
But let's face facts, if anyone can see this, and if they respond, those responses will be hateful because no one ever has a nuanced, i.e. fair and balanced, viewpoint anymore.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ancavalcanti92 Like I said, no one would get my point. First of all, the damages were in relation to the people who write the software. If you give away your code for free, when someone uses it in contravention of licensing terms, you don't suffer monetary damages. Second, in cases like this, breaking the licensing terms, for the farmers themselves, is perfectly valid, because as we've seen from prior case law, they have every right to do so with a piece of equipment they've bought. Taking it to a third party, i.e. not John Deere, would be perfectly reasonable and I'd recommend every farmer do that, for every repair.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Many years ago before GH was a thing, SourceForge had way fewer ads. It wasn't until after GH rose up to replace it that SF started having far too many ads. Also, what the fuck is he talking about by saying that "open source" was coined in 1998? I don't know how old he is, but it was a term when I was a youngster back in the 80's. I had subscriptions to several magazines that had printed source code. GNU has existed since at least the 80's too. When I was in high school playing with Linux there were plenty of open source programs. Maybe not the millions that there are today, but thousands at the time is no chump change.
Quite a few CVS servers had anonymous access, especially for open source projects. You rarely had to login or use guest credentials, and I tended to just not bother with projects that had such annoyances. Maybe I'm in the minority when it comes to reading changelogs, because I look at that information for nearly every repo that I play with. The `blame` feature of `git` is one of the most fun features that I use on a regular basis, too.
I will admit that I like GH being user centric. Quite a few times I've pulled a user's entire set of repos just because they made it so easy to do. I've got a `bash` script which I can just give the user name to it, and it downloads their entire list of repos and yields a flat list of repo URL's. Then I can either just automate downloading all of them one after the other, or I can use `fzf` to select specific repos. One final note regarding Mercurial is that FireFox uses it. It's one of the more annoying aspects of building it because there's a whole complicated process to getting to code. They should have just moved to using Git at some point.
1
-
1
-
Every time I hear someone talking about Redis I have to look up what it is, then I think, "huh, okay", and move on. There are better solutions, and for most people they don't even need that much. Most projects I've done have been fine with a plain hash table implementation. I've done some crazy implementations of hash tables, but most of the time a straight up implementation works. The few times I've needed something as hefty as a proper DB, yeah, alternatives exist, and I could always just write something from scratch myself, if I needed to.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not that anyone will see this, but yeah, we all get it, and some of us actually understand it, but it's easier saying/typing Wayland than typing out a full sentence to describe something. Laziness is part of why I'll never refer to the OS I use as GNU slash Linux even if I do use GNU software. Most of the rest of it being because, fuck GNU. I'm likely 100% alone in this, but I feel like the GPL has held us back far more than anything else. As for Wayland, I'm still annoyed with a lot of the decisions they've made, and the fact that instead of fixing an old project they just abandoned it to start a new one replete with mistakes made because they don't understand the decisions of their predecessors. However, as long as they fix all of their mistakes going forward and it reaches feature parity with X, I'll move over to it. If they don't, well, we'll just cross that bridge when we come to it. Let's just hope it's not an inevitability.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@BenQ.-ys4kp I've been learning it for the past 3 or 4 years and let me tell you, it's not a good language. I keep watching videos on it and they're nearly all filled with lies. They allude to or insinuate that it'll prevent every error and then sea lion on you if you call them out on it. Fact of the matter is, the types of errors that the language tries to prevent aren't actually prevented wholly by the language nor in combination with libraries that you'll inevitably have to use if you don't rewrite literally everything in Rust. The biggest source of errors is failure to check user input and it doesn't actually make that any easier. If a Rustacean tells you that memory misuse is the biggest source of errors, they're either spreading propaganda or being facile because that's only how things end up when you fail to check user input.
If you want a few examples of what's wrong with the language, look at strings, lifetimes, constructors, mutability, references. Certain keywords irritate me, but I'll admit that that may just be a personal opinion. Things like fn, let, pub, impl, mut. I abhor Java-style singular use keywords like pub and fn. If I have to use a keyword to declare a group of functions as public, then it should allow me to collectively refer to those functions instead of requiring that I use pub for every single function. I just hate function keywords in general. Look at C++ lambdas for an example of doing it mostly right. No keyword at all, though I do have issues with the array of captures component. If anyone tries to claim anything about "the most vexing parse", I'll point out that you can and should use braces to invoke constructors in C++ now and that eliminates that weird self-imposed problem. I say now, but it's been since C++11, so it's not exactly a short time and in fact has been usable since before Rust existed.
Anyhow, if YouTube doesn't shadow or delete this and you do happen to actually read it, I'd suggest C if you don't already know it, and just ignore newer languages, but if you must have classes, operator overloading, templates and RAII, then sure, go for C++.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Personally, I wish there was a law requiring firmware and drivers to be open source. Operating system, individual programs, sure, close them if you want, but firmware and drivers should be open source. Furthermore, I think there should be an open standard for how drivers should be written because we need x86 and ARM developers to have the same methodology. I, for one, would absolutely buy a piece of hardware that I could plug and play with my Raspberry Pi and desktop computer both, even if it was a $5,000 graphics card.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shallex5744 Yeah, we'd have everything without GNU, it just would have taken a different form. I wouldn't mind if it was less socialism focused. The GPL, whatever version you want to use, restricts users far too much. If MIT or APL or any others along those lines had won out, Linux might have a larger user base, more developers, higher pay for those developing for it. Who knows. This is all speculation, because we won't ever know now, but given real world experience, it's probably an accurate guess.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Soulskinner It sounds like you don't understand what I was saying. Microsoft illegally used GPL code, full stop. No one who wrote any of that code made money off of it. If you write code and use a personal license, monetizing the code is up to you. If you don't monetize it in some way and release it, then the code was merely given away, and at that time it doesn't matter what license you use, as you won't make money off of writing it. The government should file an antitrust lawsuit against MS, but they apparently refuse to, and not just for illegally using something contrary to its license. The majority of people that get money from contributing to open source are getting that money from using their time to contribute, not from the source code itself. So it doesn't matter what license they use, it's the monetization methodology that matters. The GPL precludes doing some things which could allow a programmer to make more money, and especially off of their code directly. There's absolutely nothing to prevent a program from being open sourced several years later, or having a license that requires users of your program to not share the source code. If MIT or BSD or APL had been the go to choice for licensing, we might have had less open source, note might have, but even if we had, there would've likely been more money made and more code written professionally. Again I'll say it, that this is hypothetical, but if you understand the economics of it all, you'll realize it's a very likely scenario.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Simultaneously, nothing surprises me, and everything surprises me. I lost all faith in humanity about 35 years ago, maybe more, I can't quite remember clearly enough to pinpoint the exact date, but it's been out the window since then. I try to enjoy the things in my life that are enjoyable, but it's getting harder and harder knowing that there's no future on this planet and with these people. Knowing that at some point I'm really and truly going to have to leave this planet and ignore it as it burns behind me. Some of you I'm going to miss, and a lot. I wish I could save you, but it's been pounded into my skull since I was born into this body, that I can take no action, only watch. I wish you all would save yourselves.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I really wish I could get someone to acknowledge the truth, but the issue is not memory safety. The issue is failure to check user input. The memory errors are the end result, as in a symptom but not the cause. Microsoft can be stupid, and all the others that tout that 70% number, but it's all misinterpretation of what they're seeing. It's like they're looking at a murder scene where a person was stabbed to death and they conclude that blood loss is why the victim is dead. It's both technically true and false at the same time. Technically they lost enough blood for it to kill them, but if it wasn't for the knife they wouldn't have lost it.
Also, when a new language deletes features from their predecessors, it's a huge code smell. It speaks to a fundamental misunderstanding of the whole picture and much like the aforementioned memory errors speaks to a person who's a poor diagnostician. It's like when I first heard about Java and they said they wouldn't have the goto keyword, which had a number of legitimate uses, and then found years later they finally realized what some of those legitimate uses were that they hadn't previously accounted for and added named breaks. Unfortunately, unions are an incredibly useful feature of C, and deleting that is shortsighted.
1
-
I agree that STEM degrees are pointless, but not for the reason you think. Everything they teach you can learn on your own and for free, if you're committed enough to do so. However, if you're worried about not needing to know how to implement qsort or binary trees in your daily work, then your teachers failed to teach you why you should know how to do these things. It's not about being able to implement them on a whim because 99% of us will never need that ability, but rather about using the basic knowledge of how to implement algorithms and translate their forms. That knowledge is something that 100% of developers need.
Also, it's difficult to tell when you're being sarcastic, assuming you were at those points, because you maintained a fairly even monotone. For anyone who might happen to read this, I refer to the point about doing sudokus and using AWS, as a sudoku will have a variable difficulty while AWS has no difficulty at all. Point and click "development" doesn't require any intelligence to do and you'll never need a degree to be capable of doing it, even if a job requires it. If someone wants to get into the industry, it truthfully doesn't even require a degree. There will always be plenty of jobs because most people think you can just throw better hardware at the problem and use garbage code, but we'll always need people who understand the inner workings to properly optimize things.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What you're trying to ask as a question is, who determines what the truth is? If those on the left get to determine truth, then we'll never have it again. And I've said it before and I'll say it again, but we don't need to worry about AGI acquiring sentience and deciding to wipe us all out, the technology already exists for a truly evil person to put the pieces together and do it now without any actual intelligence needed, and I don't just mean computer intelligence, but human too. You could literally fit the pieces together today even if you're a numpty, and believe you me, the people that would do it are definitely numpties.
I know, it's futile to say anything because if YouTube doesn't shadow or outright delete this post no one will read it anyway and even should one or two read it, none will heed the warning inherent within, and even should one heed the warning they'll lack the power to do anything about it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not that anyone will take this comment well, not that anyone will read this comment, not that I care, but programming languages shouldn't be used for configuration files. I've tried doing this in the past with my own programs, and I kind of hated configuring things that way, and I'm sure end users hate it more. Most people don't understand programming, even my fellow programmers often fail at this, so asking an end user to understand the configuration, which is already somewhat arcane, is asking too much. Further, Lua sucks.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Two possibilities here, either it's the leftist mind virus eating itself, which is by far the most likely scenario, or, conspiracy theory, it could be influenced by closed source companies trying to destroy their enemy, open source, from within. Now, obviously, if you really hate Microsoft, then you're going to automatically assume the latter given their EEE initiatives, but unless you can find concrete proof, you should probably consider that it's the former. Occam's Razor, after all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@drownthepoor I knew people wouldn't understand the point, but let's see if I can rephrase it so it's easier to understand. GNU then was basically the equivalent to the Rust Foundation now. They manipulate people in some subtle, and some not-so-subtle ways to get them to use the GPL, not that I'm saying the Rust Foundation wants people to use the GPL, but using their rewrite everything in Rust objective as a contrasting point. Once a project is stamped with the GPL, you can't just do whatever you want with it willy-nilly. Had the license of choice been BSD, MIT or some other non-restrictive license, or had they not gone after people with rabid lawyers, then things would be drastically different. Most would argue that the difference would be that nothing would be open source, I posit the exact opposite that we'd have a wealth of open source. Of course, people that are fully inculcated in the cult won't ever agree with me, like Rustaceans won't ever agree that Rust is the wrong choice. And more pointedly you won't see my response because YouTube will likely filter such a long response when I have neither clicked like nor dislike on your post. I guess we'll see in a day or so, or 5 months if I can expect a similar response time.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I know most will disagree with this, but since no one will read it anyway whatever, but the ideological purity tests relating to licensing is what has held open source back the most. It provided ammunition for the enemies of open source, such as Microsoft, and allowed them to run a very successful propagandistic campaign against it. As for Qt versus GTK, even as a KDE user, I still write GUI apps using GTK because I generally avoid C++. Not that I can't use it, but rather that I don't want to. A lot of the newer features, things added in C++17 and beyond, are features I definitely want in a programming language, but not the way they're implemented in C++. I love C, and use it for nearly every personal project, but eventually I'm hoping to move to my own language. I just need to acquire more free time to work on it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Personally, I'd advise no one to ever learn Rust. C runs on far more platforms, is significantly less bloated, and if you learn it well you can parlay those skills into other languages. However, you shouldn't just learn the syntax of C, but its standard library and all of the modern features that it provides, such as _Generic. The fact that the feature has been around for as long as it has and so many people still don't know of its existence is rather sad. If you learn C that well, then I'd suggest learning C++. If you learn C++ you'll have a much easier time doing just about anything and anywhere. If you're interested in game development, then definitely that path is the better option, but also if you want to get deep into the weeds and learn how to be a better game programmer, then learn about 3D math while you're at it and maybe even learn some assembly. I can't imagine that many, if any, people wanting to get into programming would deliberately intend to get into low level programming, writing drivers and so on, but if anyone does decide they want to do that, I would learn C and assembly in tandem and read the processor manuals from Intel, AMD and ARM. Both Intel and AMD have optimization manuals and they're definitively a must read even if you don't want to do assembly at all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
My thoughts, not that anyone will read them or care, is that it takes absolutely zero maintenance for code that was previously known to work if you never touch it or do anything with it. Not everyone can figure out how to use git to pull back in a piece of code to make a driver work for their old hardware, nor should a project maintainer expect them to. Yeah, compiling the kernel is somewhat complicated, but less so if you follow the instructions on how to get it compiled. So if they delete the code, they damn well better include instructions for any inexperienced users to know how to finagle git and pull the old code back in. They can make that an easier process and I hope they do. As for arguments about the old hardware being insecure, that's completely irrelevant considering the mitigations that can be made with regards to WiFi and the lack of range of these devices mean you'll probably use them next to the router and only in your own home anyway. Yeah, still potentially problem causing, but that's the risk anyone has to take when using older tech in any semi-serious manner. In short, it costs them more to delete this code and then accommodate for those that may still need it, either now or later, than it would to just leave it in place and never touch it, both in terms of them having to maintain instructions for how to bring it back or have a hassle from users that want it, as well as in terms of storage space and network bandwidth as the changes take up hidden space.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is why indie devs should focus on open source engines. There are more than three engines as well, whether open or closed source. I often wonder if anyone has thought of reviving Crystal Space. I went looking for any developments on it last year and downloaded the latest version, but it hasn't been updated in over a decade. Seems to be an abandoned project, which sucks. I can't remember what used it, but several games I played like 20-ish years ago used it and they worked well, but it may require massive changes to work on modern hardware. I'd provide a link, but YT doesn't like outside links. However, WP does have a page on all the various game engines, and any of the older engines which are now open source would be great to develop a game with. Such as that for any of the Doom's or Quake's, all of D1-3 and Q1-4 are now open. I think they opened the Duke Nukem engine as well. If you're reading this comment and still reading it here, go find them all now and stop reading this comment. Seriously, learn to program if you can't already, learn Blender, make a game. Quit reading this, go make a game!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not nearly enough people have come to realize the truth, but the slippery slope is real. They keep nibbling away at what they deem acceptable until all gun content is just outright banned. As far as moving to a new platform, I prefer ad supported content because I would like to maintain some modicum of anonymity on the internet. The best type of ads are those that are embedded in the video because I can watch them at 2x like I do for all video content that allows it, and only if they're obnoxious will I skip them, but the content creator will still have gotten paid. I think the more fair business model for YouTube should be that they get nothing from the creators unless the creators get ad money from a sponsor. If the agreement was getting a cut of your sponsorship money then it would be the perfect platform, free-ish but supported by ads through the creator. Then the users would be able to take or leave the ads as they please, the creators would get paid, YouTube would get paid, and most people would be happy. However, YouTube is greedy and still runs forced ads on content which doesn't have monetization turned on and takes all of the profit from that. Yeah, they have server costs, but they're getting so much ad money that it's literally impossible for them to not be turning a profit unless they're mismanaging things behind the scenes, and that's not on any of us, users or content creators, to fix and/or make up for. It also should not be in their purview of what content to censor so long as such content is legal.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I would've said that FlatPak was a good runner up a couple of years ago, but now that I'm on Slackware 15 and it not only works but I've got several apps that refused to build from source which work as FlatPak's, I like it a bit more now. AppImage's are definitely the best though, because I can just plop it somewhere, chmod +x it and go. No installation, no fiddling or faddling, just run it right after download. Yeah, you have to trust the person that puts it together, but you have to trust a lot of people already when it comes to using any computer. You have to trust that all of the hardware manufacturers aren't putting in backdoors, which we now know they pretty much all do, and you have to trust the OS distributor, which for Linux you mostly can, and you have to trust each of the applications you have running on your system which may or may not be written by and/or maintained by anyone that has your best interests at heart. So unless you make all your own hardware and software, you eventually have to trust someone.
1
-
I love the F-35, but trust me, drones will be fully autonomous in the very near future and be a significant force multiplyer. As for not being able to take out a bridge. that's just naivety. Consider this scenario, you have a small vehicle with 20 drones each carrying a pound of C4. They pop out of the trunk of the car as it drives over the bridge and fly to support columns. If you're telling me that every single bridge in the world won't come down with that kind of assault, you're dreaming. Now let's imagine that a nuclear capable state fits each of their drones with a micro-nuke. Do you still think they won't be able to take out far larger targets? Do you remember the 50's? The US had nuclear hand grenades. So yeah, if it's Russia or China, you better believe they could make a micro-nuke and fit it onto a relatively small drone. Then you have stealth. You could fully automate a stealth drone and put smaller drones in it with micro-nukes. Jet into a war zone from a couple hundred miles away, drop a ton of smart nuke drones, and bye bye target.
And if you think that fully autonomous drones aren't possible now, then you haven't been paying attention to all the NN-based tech out there. People are connecting high powered graphics cards with massive parallel processing capabilities to Raspberry Pi's. If you think that they won't have smaller packages for this technology in the next five years and the ability to transfer their models to every drone in their fleet in a matter of minutes, then yet again I have to say you haven't been paying attention. We already have databases that are easily accessible and can already perform advanced image recognition. With the right coding everything can be glued together now to make a terminator style HK drone. Full automation is one general, defense secretary and/or president away from becoming a reality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I like your high intensity, and my suggestions on programming languages to learn would be C, not C++ or C# but pure C as well as BASIC, Pascal and LISP. Why those? For LISP, if you can more completely understand how things work in it, you can understand how to write better code overall, and if you translate things written in LISP to C, and don't use recursion, you'll be way better off. BASIC can teach you simplicity and doing something with very few resources. Pascal can show an alternative viewpoint on systems programming. If you were going to make a job out of it, I'd suggest assembly as well to learn how to think at a low level. Finally, a bonus suggestion just for fun, a language I probably can't say without being censored but I'll obscure it as BrainF***. It only has 8 instructions and you shouldn't use it in a serious manner, but who knows, you might find it fun to play with. In fact, if you disregard all the rest, just give BF a try, for fun.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You know what I miss, elinks. Back when Yahoo chat was a thing, that's what I used for nearly all of my web browsing needs. If, and that's a mighty big if, I needed a proper GUI browser for something, I would use Firefox, and at that time it really was the best browser. There was also a time when I would use Opera for all my browsing needs, before they swapped to using Chromium, and at that time, Opera was far better than Firefox. Like all things in tech, the more they change, the worse they get. I can't even use elinks now because it won't work at all on the modern web, and I can't stand to use any Chromium based browser, even Brave which people keep recommending. Firefox is the last browser standing as far as I'm concerned, and I'm getting to the point where I hate even that. If Ladybird doesn't drastically improve things over Firefox, I can't see switching to it. Ultimately, I may be forced to write my own browser from scratch and that's a multi-year project to even get something off the ground, unless the internet fundamentally changes. If we could get rid of HTML/CSS/JS, then the world and browsers would be far better off.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's not that the politicians making the laws don't know how a gun works at the most basic levels, which they don't, but that they don't care. They want to further their agenda and will lie, cheat and steal just to accomplish it. For them, it's not about safety, but about controlling the masses. They want power over all, very likely because they have a god complex, but who knows for sure why. Also, it probably shouldn't be a surprise, but YT recommends channels like yours over channels that take the debate more seriously. My assumption about why is because they probably think that your content in any way trivializes those on the right and thus is less dangerous for leftists to see because they won't think critically about what they're seeing and change their viewpoints, but if that's a correct assumption, I think they're wrong. I think that the comedy allows your more intelligent message to seep into their tiny brains under the radar. I think that it's more likely to change them. I guess time will tell.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@d3line Nearly all programmers are bad programmers, this is a known fact. So instead of making it easier for them to be programmers and make far worse mistakes than common ones, let's instead shut them out. Linux has bugs because it has thousands of developers who probably shouldn't be allowed to contribute code to it. How many of those bugs are for the common core of Linux as opposed to drivers for hardware that not everyone uses? Do you know? Do you even understand the difference? A Raspberry Pi may not have the limitations of an Arduino or some other niche piece of hardware, but you still shouldn't be cavalier with resources. There are many applications where you need smaller hardware and using Java isn't an option, but what's more is like Rust, many of the features are unimplemented on such hardware and all you get is the syntax. Proving code correctness is impossible for a program to do, at best you can prove partial correctness, which is not good enough. If bounds checking is only done at compile time, then when your improperly written code encounters an out of bounds condition at runtime the check will have proven worthless. So it's slowing down the compile time for little potential benefit to prevent errors which don't happen with good programmers and no benefit for the runtime portion. So it won't slow down the running code, sure, but it won't catch the more pernicious errors. In fact, Rust won't catch the majority of the more pernicious errors which mostly occur because idiots slip through the cracks by learning languages like Java, Python, Go, C# and yes Rust. As for what Microsoft thinks, I don't care, I don't use Windows and won't and they can suck a big D.
1
-
@d3line Let's see, false equivalency, as flying airplanes is not the same as writing code. As well errors made there are more immediate unless you're using bad code. Oh wait, that's happened and they had to ground a huge swath of planes which had slow building problems because of poorly written code. For kernel vulnerabilities, do you have any idea how to trigger any of those? How long did it take to find them? On the RPi you just made another argument for me because a dingus like most new developers are these days won't understand algorithmic complexity and won't have any clue how to actually implement them. So good luck getting one of them to write good code for embedded systems and if they don't learn it early, good luck getting them in later years to do it as well. You mistakenly assumed I was talking about hardware features when I was talking about software features, as in what the language provides, or in this case fails to. And the point still stands that at that level, Rust and C are on equal footing except for a few points which as I said only apply to bad programmers. Bounds checking can be as simple as "you're using `i` to index the array and checking at the top against a.len()", but if you have a mutating index, as in based on data that may be external to not just the module you're writing but your entire program, it would have to either do runtime bounds checking for each access or none at all. For work on embedded systems you'll encounter that a lot. Airbags actually do cause more harm than good, so that's an invalid point right there. Microsoft still can't write a good OS, but you trust their expertise on writing good code? Talking to beginners is, hopefully, how I influence the world to be better. If I can dissuade ones like you from writing code the world is that much better, and if I can teach better ones than you to write better code by them learning better techniques, better still.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@d3line You're not making a whole lot of sense here. You don't support closed source, fine, I don't either, but to act as though no one else will, that's just stupid. If you're using a library you wrote yourself or one that someone wrote who is into open source, then yeah you'll see the potential failure points, but there will be multitudes who will be using closed source binary blobs and literally can not see into it without reverse engineering it. If you were claiming that Rust can't do that, and we both know you're not, then you'd be really idiotic. Instead you're obfuscating by alluding to one thing and saying the opposite, and don't tell me that's not intentional. With regards to low level code, you seem to be under the delusion that Rust will prevent all errors while still stating that it won't, or maybe it's just your unwillingness to acknowledge that you agree with me on this point, but at the low level some of us write code at, Rust offers no advantages that C doesn't also offer over and above assembly. Further, there are far more compilers and target system code generators for C infrastructure than for Rust. From the sounds of things, you seem to be confused about a lot. At least I hope it's confusion because the alternative is gaslighting. If you're writing code at a high level, as in not system level programming, then use Rust if you want, even if it's still not the right choice for any job thus far. It won't make your code better than anyone else's code, and if you're a bad programmer you won't compare favorably to a good programmer no matter what language you're using.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dynfoxx It may not be GC on the level of Java, but it is GC. It's more or less a clone of C++'s most common style of GC. From a technical standpoint, it could be included in a kernel, but doing so will add the kind of overhead that shouldn't be in a kernel. Although it sounds like you disagree with that assessment.
I don't see how you can conclude that they provide safe concurrency either. With barely over a decade of testing I'd need to see a fairly conclusive set of tests to prove that.
As for the example, it wasn't meant as an example of known problems that Rust programmers have, although they very likely will, but rather as an example of how there are so many types of errors that they either don't or can't protect against and shouldn't be lulling newbies into a false sense of security by claiming they solve any class of errors.
On top of that, in a kernel you need guarantees of speed. If you keep bounds checking turned on then your code will run significantly slower in quite a few circumstances than code which isn't bounds checked. If you turn the feature off, you're no better than C. You can claim that features like lifetimes and ownership will make it better, but the implementation requires extra code there that also slows things down. The runtime of a kernel shouldn't be holding your hand if you develop for the kernel, you should be at least a good programmer to do such work if not a great one.
Of course, a lot of my opinion on this matter stems from the fact that I've worked with a lot of newbie programmers and I understand their psychology somewhat, and if you give a mouse a rope and tell them to hoist themself to the rafters, they'll very likely do so by their neck.
1
-
@dynfoxx It's not the same as calling free() in C. It's more like the methodology of C++, and yes, it is indeed extra overhead. If you implement your code in a library and interface it with other code, regardless of language, you can't have runtime checks of their correctness. There will also be certain checks for correctness that you can't perform in such a scenario even if you stipulate every expectation for code that calls yours, and yes even if the "client" in this scenario is also written in Rust.
The biggest reason for my complaints about Rust in this regard is how similar it functions to C++, except that the language designers have chosen all the methodology for how things will work, and lead everyone they can into believing the language is safe. For you to claim that you can merely bypass their decisions for how you should do things by declaring your code unsafe is absolutely wrong. Essentially, what you're saying is, use a pointless keyword that gives those who don't use it a false sense of security and just write it in C with a weird syntax.
You keep talking about C++ features in Rust but you're using exclusively the Rust names as though I have no idea how one or the other or both work and then you're claiming it doesn't work the way you and I both know it does. Have you ever used C++? Do you know of all the features it includes? Even just up to 11? If you're as staunch a Rustacean as you seem, I wouldn't expect you to keep up with 17, and certainly not the latest standard, but at least 11 which was the last standard before Rust was released.
1
-
@dynfoxx You still aren't understanding my argument here, but let's quibble over the details instead. Drop does more than you think, take a look at the assembly output sometime. That's a lot of overhead. I'm not even limiting this to FFI, even calling pre-compiled Rust from some other library is a potential problem. Part of my disagreement with unsafe code in Rust is the explicit labelling of that code as unsafe. There is no safe code in any programming language until it has been properly debugged and merely not crashing is not good enough, especially in kernel space. Whether you can bypass bounds checking wasn't the issue, because of course you can, but that's not the only way memory is accessed. I'm not sure why you brought up version 1.0 when I wasn't stipulating any particular version, just when it was first released, and the first version available was 0.1, which was released in 2012. That's not to say the creators of the language weren't toying with it earlier. After all, some people develop their own languages and toy with them for over a decade before making a public release.
1
-
@dynfoxx If it inlines it, which isn't a guarantee. If you were writing it in C, sure, it would be up to the programmer to get it right, but if they do, and multiple decades old code will be right due to debugging work, then it'll work more efficiently without the need for quasi-guarantees as it will already have been guaranteed for years.
How are logical issues merely an API issue? Any programmer can get those wrong at any level, no need to be an API implementer nor need it be down to how the API is used, both could be at fault as well, at the same time. Also, you and the Rust developers can't guarantee that bugs will be found and fixed in a timely manner any more than kernel developers already can, and bugs found in C code do actually get fixed.
Obviously the guarantees that the kernel already provides should be good enough, but introducing a new language requires checking everything all over again. I wouldn't want C++ being introduced any more than Rust or any other language of such complexity, and they did try C++ for a time and rejected it as I'm hoping they will for Rust. However, what the future holds on that we both definitely disagree.
As for an MTC on Godbolt, that'll have to wait until I'm finished moving. Something that I'm sure doesn't normally take this long, but it's exhausting when you can't take time off to do personal things.
1
-
@dynfoxx The point about bugs in C was that most of the C code is so old that it has already been debugged, whereas if any Rust code is added it'll require that process start anew.
As for guarantees, like I said, everything it already provides, whether that's dependent on any given language or not, as long as it keeps on truckin' as good as it always has. I've not run any tests as I don't use Windows, but I'd wager it is faster and more memory efficient than the Windows kernel. If Rust in the kernel works as well as the C code, I would definitely reevaluate my position on it, but I'd also have to audit such source myself before I'd trust it.
My main objection to it is not just that it isn't and can't possibly be as safe as they claim, but that it gives far too many newbies too much confidence that they can write kernel modules and there are far too many programmers that I wouldn't trust to write a clone of notepad let alone a kernel module. Hopefully you can at least understand that particular point of view, maybe even agree with it somewhat?
1
-
1
-
@dynfoxx If the tools catch the error, then you'll know where to look, but if they don't you'll think you know, and look at the "unsafe" bits and be very confused if those are the only parts that are correct. With C, not C++, since the entire program is deemed, by some but not all, to be unsafe, then you'll only know where to look by figuring out what it's doing wrong. If you apply such knowledge in a general manner, it would benefit you more as a Rust developer. Don't depend on the tools to do your job for you, in other words. Hopefully you'll influence others to be good or great programmers, even if they are using Rust.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@michawhite7613 Social security is a waste because they don't properly invest the money. So you pay in X, get back X/4, if you're lucky, and they've gone from what should have been X+(1% to 3%) to actually being 0. If you instead didn't pay into SS and invested the money yourself you'd at least have X+1%, more if you know what you're doing. Defense spending and that of our intelligence organizations is largely wasted. Our military personnel get paid next to nothing while we spend billions on equipment that barely gets used. Our military is one of the largest in the world. Paying $10,000 for a hammer is clearly a waste, especially as it goes to funding the black budget that gets used to overthrow other countries and install different dictators who we later have to go in and either overthrow again or consider that country a loss. Property, income and inheritance taxes are all immoral, and were it not for a stolen amendment income taxes would be illegal and whether anyone is willing or capable of challenging the IRS on this, property and inheritance taxes are also illegal. What you're referring to with broccoli is a stupid analogy that seems to be referencing insurance. Money is fungible, and no valid health care should be denied. I don't think you understand the full breadth and scope of what the government does because they waste a LOT of money. Many of the organizations that we have shouldn't even exist and quite a few are redundant 10 times over. If you consider state governments and what they do, then the federal government is even duplicating a lot of their efforts too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@juanzubieta5080 I don't even have a Templates folder. I deleted it myself because I didn't use it. I still see multiple files listed in the "Create New" menu. However, that's an XDG thing, not strictly KDE. I used KDE as an example because most new users will use it, but other DE's have the same functionality. You mention Mint, which uses Cinnamon by default, last I checked, and that is based on Gnome. So if it has it, then Gnome does too, which covers the two biggest DE's that people will use, whether a new user or not.
And in case you ask, I just checked if the functionality still works despite not having a Templates folder and yep, it sure does.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@knoopx Can you really though? It kind of sounds like the same nonsense with the language used on Arduino's, which some refer to as C, and it isn't, and some refer to as C++, and it still isn't, or the "micro-"Python lie. Sure, having a pared down version of a language is neat, but less useful. And then once the uutils are on your device, how much room do you have for whatever project you were attempting? If you give me that nonsense about using a flash drive then you're not really using an embedded platform and you might as well use a Raspberry Pi. On the other hand, ToyBox exists and provides all these in less than the space of a floppy, and it was written by one man, and in C.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I never really bothered to look into how X handles keyboard input, so I definitely need to do that. It would've made sense, to me anyway, if keyboard input only went to the app that currently has focus. Which as I understand it is how Wayland does it. However, if you set a global shortcut, it would've made sense to have a registry of callbacks for functionality and to have the main program, whatever it is in such a system, deliver messages to the individual programs. Like say opening a private browsing window in your browser of choice. Each installed browser could register that they can handle that functionality and tell the system how, as in calling the program with certain flags, and the user could configure it with the whole system configuration app and tell it which browser to use when you input that shortcut. If the individual programs request specific keyboard shortcuts, then that either means that changing them in-app, if the app even allows that, would require that it send a message back to the system to refresh things. That's a complicated mess. Although, if every shortcut combo, regardless of global or local scope, merely sent a message to a callback function, say by treating the program while it's running as a server and passing it messages, then shortcuts could even be configured custom per app without the app even having to know what they are. If anyone knows how they both work and want to clear this up for me and maybe explain some reasoning behind whatever decisions they made, have at it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sergiitk When you consider that you have to issue a separate instruction to store the index in a register, then decrement it, then either use lea then mov, or just mov, to read from the memory, it adds overhead. You say negligible, okay, but then process a list of a million elements and maybe you'll start to appreciate how much overhead it costs you. If you're curious as to why you wouldn't just use lea then mov, without the other junk, you might be dealing with object sizes that aren't a power of two, or are too large to be handled in that way with lea.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As someone who likely spends too much time learning every new language that comes along, I can safely say that both Go and Rust are a mistake. However, if it was already working in Go, you're absolutely correct that it should've just stayed in Go. Rewriting a project in an entirely new language just because you like it is the easiest way to completely fuck up a project. I would argue that any new project these days should probably be written in a domain specific language, and if it's intended to run in a web browser the only choices are really just JavaScript and TypeScript and since TypeScript just compiles to JavaScript and is fully backwards compatible, it's not exactly different enough yet. If it's a backend application then the only real choice is C++. The reason being that it's a far better language than both Go and Rust combined and runs fast and compiles fast. Every time I use Rust I feel annoyed because it's basically a clone of C++ but with a shittier syntax and slower compile times because it aims to be more strict. Well, C++ compilers have all gotten better in nearly every way, and can enforce a lot of strictness on you while still compiling faster. Also, that part about not being able to interface between code generated with MingW and MSVC really hits hard. When interfacing different languages you have to compete with name mangling and a truly portable interface should be written for C compatibility, not just because you might just use C to interact with it, but because it doesn't mangle names.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I don't think that any of them are worth the price they charge. The hardest parts of the whole thing would be the processor, the battery and the wireless tech. You can buy a good wireless dongle for $40, and note that's a good one, you can buy an okay one for $20, but for VR you'd want a good one. The battery will be overpriced no matter what, and not small enough, but maybe if you have controllers tethered to the headset, if that's a compromise anyone could take, you could have a large set of 18650 cells and power it all that way. That just leaves the processor, which would have to have at least 4 cores, at a minimum of 2ghz, to give a good experience here. And it would require a built-in GPU, i.e. be a SOC. All of those requirements, plus the easier to satisfy base requirements for the hardware, would run you maybe $150. The hardest part once the hardware was designed would be the software, and given the lack of support for ARM chips, which yeah, has gotten better but still isn't as good as x86, would likely still suck. So, if someone uses an AMD chip instead, like say a Ryzen, then we'd have a useful VR headset that performs well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I haven't taken a job where I've had to use Windows in many years, and my knowledge of how Windows works is woefully out of date. If we were talking about 32-bit Windows, as in the Win32 API, then sure, I could do it, but I've had the leeway to opt out of any job that requires Windows and have thusly rejected them all. I realize that's a luxury that most can't afford, but I'd love it if businesses would stop forcing employees to use a particular system. I know, legacy software and whatever weird new software that requires Windows, but they should push for more adoption of Linux and open source in general instead of acquiescing to the demands of their vendors. That's not to say that I'm against closed source, but I feel like it's only really acceptable in a vanishingly narrow range of uses. As for religion, I've seen some good points brought up by others in this comment section as to why that would be a valid argument against using Windows or software in general from any company that actively supports causes that are antithetical to their personal beliefs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@diadetediotedio6918 I'll have to start keeping a file then, because I keep seeing this toxic behavior, including from yourself on several occasions. Being a better programmer is only partly based in knowledge, a great deal comes from intelligence. If a person isn't intelligent enough to be in this profession, we shouldn't gloss over major details and expect them to do well or forget that results do matter. I don't care if someone wants to whine about gatekeeping, technical fields require it to keep the world from imploding. I wouldn't want a bridge designer who had no understanding of physics, and I don't want the politicians we have now who have no understanding of material degradation. Real people have died as a result of incompetence, in many fields. Making mistakes more difficult is a step in the right direction, but unfortunately, the methodology chosen was several steps in the wrong direction and the behavior from the community at large is several more. As for C++ programmers, I dislike most of them because they are elitist A-holes. They often look down on everybody. I have seen some negative behavior from fellow C coders, but it's mostly a reaction to the outright toxic behavior from the overwhelming majority of Rustaceans.
1
-
@swampcritterisbackbaby1740 I think you're arguing a teeny, tiny technicality to someone who otherwise completely agrees with you. Maybe you both don't understand each others points, but he's right that white people are being dehumanized in the eyes of those on the left to facilitate what will in the future be a purge of all or most white people. It matters not why the elites in Africa sold many of their own race to the slavers shipping to America, because it was the slavers who dehumanized the slaves and justified selling them in America. As for those talking about the southerners wanting to classify their slaves as humans while the northerners did not, that was merely to increase their voting power, not because they genuinely believed they were humans or worthy of any consideration. Ultimately, it matters little whether the slave owners were racist or not as they didn't care for the humanity of those they were using, and sadly, those in the north who wanted to free them often didn't care for their humanity either, they just wanted to increase their own power. In the present day, those on the left have figured out how to use false racism as a way to increase their power and as a result have made the country more racist.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JacksonNick-j6i For UNIX and BSD, the reason is obvious if you study history: licensing. In UNIX's case it would've inhibited open software as well as doing nearly anything you want with it, and at the time lawsuits made BSD's future viability questionable. Before all of that was settled, Linux itself was viable, so people stuck with what they knew. The reason for newer programming languages is less obvious and the goals aren't always met. In general, we've had an absolute flood of newer programmers in recent years and the proposed solution for their education, which is lacking given the modern standards, is to write a toddler-proof language so they don't make mistakes. None of them have worked because you still need to get real work done and you can't baby-proof everything and hope to achieve everything, let alone at good speed. People will claim that Rust has or can, but it's a lie because the language only solves two potential problems and not very well since the syntax is worse than C++. If you want to write correct programs, the only solution is better education, not a new language. If you accept that truth, then the only reason becomes one of wanting better ergonomics. This is why more expert programmers use certain languages over others, but they're not necessarily for newbs. Of course, if you're a newb, then Rust is probably right up your alley. I choose to get work done instead and not being a newb I'll do so without bugs while not having a babysitter.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If Android really has a problem with large contiguous blocks of memory, then the easy solution is multiple arrays. Still less memory than a linked list, regardless of how negligible you think one or two pointers are it can cause jagged allocation sizes which means more padding and can add up to a significant amount with the more frames you have. However, the correct solution would be to use low-level access and write your own allocator. Writing your own allocator means you can size the ring buffer to a specific amount of raw frames, tuned specifically for the platform that it's running on, and it'll be faster and lighter in every respect. It's a weird thought, but even with a singular operating system, you can still have different enough hardware that it requires tuning.
In general, I haven't found more than two real-world use-cases for linked lists when dealing with large amounts of data, and those two cases are still highly specialized. When you're storing just a few things, then a linked structure might be fine. If you need algorithmic structure, a tree will always be better than a flat list. If you merely need ordering, in 99% of cases an array is the best.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You'll probably never see this, given the deluge of comments, but I'll say it anyway just in case. There will be no right-leaning backlash, no matter how far right anyone might lean, those on the right have actual morals. If a movement crops up that violently takes out the current woke leftists, it'll just be left on left violence because they will not have morals if they partake of such violence. That's not to say that violence would not be justified as it's the only way to correct what is wrong in society, but those that have morals and are the ones who should stand up and fight will not. Neither Roosevelt, F or T, was a conservative or in anyway right-leaning. The "New Deal" was the beginning of our downfall and it's the propaganda of the left that has left us with so many uneducated people who look at anything to the right of Mao or Stalin as being right, when they're so far left that they can't even see the right. It's assured at this point that humanity will destroy itself, it's just a matter of whether it's with violence or cowering in the corner whimpering. Whether you want to believe it or not, this latest generation is not right-leaning at all, it's just that they've bounced off the wall because evil has taken our society so far left that they couldn't go any further.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
While I'm not a Windows user, I do print things every single day. Mainly it's the puzzles from the newspaper that I print, but sometimes it's random articles or recipes. The recipes one is obvious as to why, but the random articles is because I don't want to read everything off of a screen and murder my eyes. If I had an e-ink tablet then I might read more articles that way, but those things seem to all be ungodly expensive.
As for the CVE, I know no one will listen, especially as they haven't been listening for the past 25 years I've been saying it, but nearly all integer types in code should be unsigned. Then checking the magnitude of a number is a single comparison instead of two. Also, all input from an external source, and the internet as well as the users would be an external source, should be checked for correctness. Using Rust won't eliminate the need to check user input, nor will it eliminate all memory related bugs.
1
-
1
-
I don't hate Brave despite them using crypto, but some of the things they're promoting are questionable and I'd rather not risk getting stuck with them. And yes, all crypto is a scam, which is why I've never and will never "invest" in it. Sure, some people can get rich with it, just like the stock market, but it's still a scam, just like the stock market. I invest in physical things that will be very useful when society finally collapses, which based on how things are looking should be quite soon. However, I would like to see a new internet crop up. Something that follows an open standard that isn't influenced by some greedy corporation who wants to add feature xyz to drain more money from people's wallets. We need a single monolithic language to use for this, one that acts as markup, stylesheet and programming language all in one. I'm thinking of something based off of an unholy union of PostScript and LaTeX. Hopefully you check your notifications and see this as I'd like at least one opinion on it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As a Slackware user, I tend to not use the repos at all. I just download the source, build it, make a package of that, then use installpkg to install it. Makes it easy to uninstall if I feel so inclined and I've got a version I can archive for whatever purpose I see fit. If I used a Debian based distro, like a lot of Linux users seem to, I'd use apt first, then AppImage and FlatPak, and only as a last resort would I build from source. Although, I have had a few things that refused to build from source, such as FlatPak, most things are just a matter of satisfying dependencies.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I doubt you'll read this, and it'll likely be censored by YT, but guns are not the problem either. It always was a mental health issue. Guns can not get up and walk around on their own. They can't shoot people on their own, safety features and drops notwithstanding. As a tool, they can cause a lot of damage, and they can increase the ability of a mentally ill person to murder, but so can bombs, and bombs are infinitely easier to make as an amateur and potentially far worse. Consider the simple ones built by the Boston marathon bombers. They killed relatively few people, yet destroyed far more lives than they took by a very, very wide margin. I reiterate, guns are not the problem, mental health is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The 16th amendment gives them the right. I think we need a new amendment to repeal the 16th as well as to prevent property and inheritance taxes as all three are immoral. A person should not have to pay money to live or to continue owning a piece of property they already bought and paid for nor should they have their money stolen upon death when they wish it to go to their descendants.
As for how the government funds itself, that's a debt of the country issue. If they don't steal it from us with taxes then they have to get it from somewhere else as they can't just print money. Doing so would lead to hyperinflation and would destroy the economy. In fact, every time they print new money without destroying the old money they are causing inflation and that's another way they steal money from us.
The reason that the government exists is to provide services, like emergency services of police, fire and ambulances, as well as to build roads and other public infrastructure. So yeah, taxation is theft, but it's for the public benefit. However, they do not need the vast quantities of money that they collect, which they don't even spend on what they should anymore and is mostly wasted. Most of what the government does these days is to take away our rights rather than reinforcing them. A lot of our laws and the interpretations of the SC are just flat wrong and should be erased. Nearly all of the government agencies that currently exist should be disbanded and most of the employees put in prison for mass violation of the people's constitutional rights. None of our situation will change without force that we as good people will not exert, so the government will continue to grow like a cancer and suppress the people more and more until everything finally collapses as civilizations have always done throughout history.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
For me, I like to look at the background picture, so I don't have any icons and I autohide the taskbar. I don't use the quick launch or the menu, I just assign a shortcut key for the apps I use the most and press that. Win+F for FireFox, Win+C for Chromium, Win+O for Opera, Win+K for Konsole and so on. I've got multiple desktops, so icons can't really hide and even if I used every desktop I could hit Win+D to show it. I tend to use a terminal as my app launcher and always have at least 4 open for other tasks so Win+F{1..12} to get to a desktop and a simple cd where/my/file/at; foo bar baz & works fine for those programs that I use infrequently enough to not bother shortcutting. I don't remember if it was the default, but Win+, brings up the settings app for me, so adding shortcuts is easy. I've recently been toying with the tiling functionality and set up the Win+NumPad{1..4,6..9} to region shift things. It's kind of handy when you have four terminals and want to use all the screen real estate.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SimonVaIe The issue isn't whether to do a signed or unsigned shift right, but in the adding of two numbers when the allocation is near the boundary of available memory. When the addition of l and r causes an overflow, ( l + r ) / 2 will yield an incorrect value. One suggested solution is to use a larger integer type, such as 64-bit integers, but it's still recommended that you write your code in a type agnostic and portable way. Since the calculation in question will only run log(N) times, just quit trying to optimize yourself into a failure state and do it correctly from the start. And in case you weren't aware, every single compiler I've tested this on, will optimize n / 2 into n >> 1, or in Java parlance, n >>> 1, even at an optimization level of -O0. Check with Compiler Explorer if you don't believe it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@piccoloatburgerking Unless you go back and delete your own post, everyone's going to know you brought up programming, so quick, delete it now! Also, I'll go ahead and try again, but to the original argument that started the thread, if you think that physical violence against someone is okay for them merely using words, you are evil. And yes, to censor someone for saying something you don't like is the first step to violence. You think, "they're so repugnant that it doesn't matter if I'm committing an atrocity to stop them from talking", but what makes you so arrogantly confident that you're right? The only excuse for action upon another is them first acting upon you. To do otherwise is fashism. (Misspelled on purpose because of censorship.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@casperes0912 I strongly disagree with this entire statement. There are already so many libraries, both open and closed source, that are written in C and C++, and I don't have to take time to write boilerplate code to get them to work, which are great implementations of algorithms regardless of any standard library, and that Rust doesn't by default provide. So much of the code that's gone into Rust was a rewrite of something that already existed in either C or C++, and often not a complete reimplementation. You can write good code in just about any language, but some make it harder and as ugly as C++ is, I can still make it cleaner than Rust by a wide margin. Even C can be cleaner with ease. And if you have to call a block of your code unsafe to get any real work done, then the language obviously doesn't provide real safety guarantees, nor is it complete. And if anyone wants to claim that only a tiny block of unsafe code in a known location means you know where the failure point will be, come back when you've grown up and worked on a larger project.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I've said it before and I'll say it again and hopefully people that watch your videos will read the comment even if you don't, but part of the left's goal is to control the language we use. This is why the white house (no respect there, so no capitalization), has decided for us what programming languages we should use. This is why they redefine words over and over again and demand that we use whatever words they want us to use and none of the words they don't want us to use. This is why they rewrite history and use the short memories of normies to get away with it.
What we really need is our own open source initiative. Something that is intentionally to the right, politically speaking. Not leaning, but just on the right. They should vet people based on their beliefs, just as the left does, and ensure that only people who support the rights of a baby to live once it has been created, that support the right of a person to carry a gun to protect themselves from enemies foreign and domestic, that protect children from groomers instead of mutilating their mind and body, and any other morals you can think of that the left considers optional, if not downright antithetical to their agenda of dominating humanity.
1
-
1
-
Red light cameras should be illegal, for so many reasons, but the only one that needs mentioning is that morally it's wrong. Try to consider that the traffic rules, while intended originally for safety, get applied even when safety isn't at stake or when the imposition of the rules incurs the opposite effect. Ticketing an ambulance for running a red light while a patient is in the back being transported to a hospital is one of those instances where an imposition of the rules leads to people being less safe and potentially dying. However, consider the simple case of you being alone on the road, maybe in a rural area, or maybe in the middle of the night in a big city with shittons of street lamps lighting things as well as during the day. You run through the red light for any reason at all whatsoever and the camera catches it and tickets you. You might say it's fair to evenly apply the law, but no, it's not. Why should you have your movement restricted when it matters to zero people that you stop at that red light. It's nonsensical officious BS. If anyone thinks there's a justification for that, then you need to go back in time to Germany during WWII and live there where you belong. Following rules in that manner is the kind of behavior I'd rather not see.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I use vanilla-ish Vim, have been for nearly 30 years. I haven't had a substantial change to my workflow in all that time except for when Vim added tabs. I use KDE, so manipulating window placements has always been easy, and I've got 12 virtual desktops. I've always had a decent sized monitor, so opening four terminals or three or two is my most common layout per desktop. If I need a terminal to constantly run commands, I'll generally have three or four terminal windows open, no Tmux. I know it can save sessions, but I've never needed that, especially since I just leave everything up permanently and use the sleep function of the computer when I'm going to be AFK for any lengthy period of time.
If anyone is curious as to why I say -ish, it's because every distro seems to disable mouse support in their Vim packages, so I have to build from source to enable that and I've added some other changes from the defaults throughout the years like multi-lingual support. In case no one was aware, Vim has support for Lua, Python, Ruby, Perl, Tcl and a few other languages. As for why I enable mouse support, I sometimes skim through a file and use the scroll wheel on the mouse and will even place the cursor by clicking. Not every terminal works with this feature, but Konsole and XTerm do, and those are what I've used the most over the years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
GNU has held open source back, especially with its viral GPL. The reason that people ignore the GNU is not just because it's less important than the kernel, but also because it's an infection that we need to rid ourselves of to advance the state of OSS. For those that decry the "lack of freedom" that other licenses grant the users of a piece of software, they need to realize that in nature if you don't work you don't eat. If the only reason you like the GPL is because you get the source code for free, then you're not working and you shouldn't eat. If a company produces a software product and doesn't provide the source code, then simply don't buy it, but no one is entitled to anything for free and just because source is available doesn't mean you should be able to just have it willy nilly and do with it as you please. Yeah, our copyright system is fucked, and to a lesser extent our patent system, after all a patent does still expire after 17 years, but that doesn't validate anyone's reason for piracy. There is no piece of software that on its own will save your life.
Not that anyone will read this, but I do call Android a Linux distro and anyone that disagrees can get fucked. The only reason I often refer to it as Android being the sole moniker is because the additions they've made are what make it the unique system it is, whereas GNU's "contributions" can be replaced with no loss in function, as Android, Alpine and various other distros prove. So no, Stallman does not have a point. And to further drive home my point, Graphene and the various other Linux distros based off of Android remove a lot of the problems with Android and make it a much better system.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The one point that I'd like to clarify, and it's merely a physics thing, is that when you hold hair of someone up to the sun and look through it, a person who would be described as raven haired, their hair will have a blue color, and the same is true of raven feathers. It has to do with the internal reflection of light through the structure of the protein that hair and feathers are comprised of. When you can't see it fully with enough light it just looks inky black, but give it enough and it's blue.
As for the rest of it, it's really just skin color from DNA. Not that any particular skin color is superior, it's just an inherited trait. I think the way to cure racism is to change the culture, which requires that parents don't teach their children to be racist. Unfortunately, that requires all parents to reassess their biases, not just white, but black and every other skin color as well. I've seen far more racism from black people than any other, and it doesn't help that parents teach their children to be this way and it gets passed on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The argument I wish I'd see more people make is that these leftist women cry about their rights, "their body their choice", but completely ignore the fact that roughly half of the babies they murder as a means of post-contraception are in fact female, as well as the fact that since they have differentiated DNA from both their mother and father that they are in fact not the body of their mother. It's also galling that they try to use a fewer than 2% statistic to justify allowing baby murder for all. Even worse that we now have doctors actively refusing to do their job to the detriment of women as a sort of tantrum over not being able to murder babies, because as we all very much know, they get a lot of money from doing so. All of the cases where the mother's life was in danger that the media keeps propagating as a sign that the law is currently wrong, despite the fact that in each place where they've pushed these false stories the law has exceptions for the health of the mother, the doctors are guilty of malfeasance, malpractice and in at least once case outright murder, yet they're not going after the doctors, they're going after the law. It's almost like they really are what we accuse them of, and that is a death cult. They sacrifice babies and sometimes mothers to their profane pagan gods and then blame the other side because ritual baby sacrifice should be legal in their eyes. I'll say it again, but once the egg has been fertilized it is a human being.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm all for adding tools, but they have to actually add something. Merely looking pretty isn't enough. Want colors? Well, for a good number of years ls has had --color=auto, which will disable color when piping, which is a good thing, and display it when directly to a terminal. Grep has been able to colorize matches for a while now and likewise disables that for piping, which again is a good thing. Want extra functionality? Well, that's a whole other ball of wax. I keep getting recommended to alternatives that either match the functionality of a pre-existing program but with a different way of operating. That's perfectly fine for someone who doesn't know how the old tools work, but it won't be a transferable skill and what's the point of writing new code that hasn't had 20 years of debugging work when the old program already works and has been debugged thoroughly. If someone wants to create an alternative, I say great, but add functionality and don't remove any. Programs like ripgrep irk me because they take away functionality while adding it. I don't care if they want to have different flags, that's fine, but not everything needs to be rewritten in Rust only to be missing functionality. If someone actually comes up with a cogent argument, I'd love to hear it. I doubt anyone will, and instead I await the vicious attacks from Rustaceans who refuse to be wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I've got nothing to add to this discussion, and you'll never see this anyway, so I'll just talk about VPN's. They won't really provide security or privacy, except from your ISP, if you don't log into any websites and only browse anonymously. However, the most compelling reason to use a VPN is to bypass region locking. As long as the VPN in question has enough servers so that the streamer you're logging into can't detect that it's coming through a VPN and as long as you always use a connection from that region anyway. If you usually log in from the US and then just to watch one show log in via the UK, it will be obvious and might not work. Plus, they know where the bill is being sent, which could be an additional problem. All that said, I think region locking should be illegal. From the standpoint of capitalism, it makes no sense, as they could make more money if all regions were potential customers for all content. From a moral standpoint, it's akin to censorship and censorship is definitely immoral.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
For anyone who has had the misfortune of playing with COM, I feel for you. I briefly touched COM and MFC and regretted every second of it. I looked into using C# when it first cropped up and hated it immediately and thus dropped it like a hot potato. I looked into it again when the mono project came about because more and more people were using C# and it would be the only means by which I could use their code, if it was written portably, which it never was, but I couldn't get it working back then and never looked at it again until this year. Now, mono is a hugely bloated project, but it works, so I can theoretically build someone's C# project now. However, everything I've learned of C# tells me I'm better off with C, and occasionally C++ because sometimes that's required of me, but this whole story has taught me that I was right to avoid the entire mess that is C#, originally a poor clone of Java, now it very likely has a kitchen sink somewhere hidden deep in the code and definitely not for the better. I've learned all the quirks, and while it's worth it for low level programming, and sometimes high level, interoperability between languages is not fun, and completely useless if you use the one true language of C. My recommendation, learn RayLib, use pure C, and enjoy programming, because if you use the language the correct way, the quirks are barely a thought, and the way to cope with them hurts less than using a horrible language.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I used to recommend Unreal and Godot for anyone asking about game engines. If they wanted something that was specifically open source, I'd say Godot, but now I can't recommend most open source engines. Godot is now toxically verboten, and most of the rest are either abandonware or plain garbage. The only non-open engine I would ever recommend is Unreal, and it only doesn't fit the definition of open if we use the FSF or OSI definitions. Technically, the entire source is available to do with more or less as you please, just so long as you don't redistribute the source or your changes. Their licensing isn't particularly onerous, and it is the best engine.
However, there are a few open source engines that people often forget about which can be used to create some really great games and have been used for such in the past and present and possibly future. I speak, of course, about the Doom and Quake engines. Doom and Quake 1 through 3 are all open source. Doom 3 runs just about everywhere and is as modern as most anyone really needs. I've been playing through the game again after over a decade of not playing it because my OG XBox had died on me, and my computer is a potato with no discrete graphics.
So, for anyone considering making a game, if you want my recommendation for game engines: 1) Unreal 2) Doom 3. That is all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, you already know what my take will be before I've said it, but I'll say it anyway. Worrying about the future is a pasttime for some people and you'll never get them to stop and live in the moment. Any MFA that uses a cell phone in any capacity, but especially if it's an iOS or Android device, isn't going to be any more secure than having a single password, and it'll be more annoying if your device gets lost or stolen. Aside from that, it'll be annoying when you have to use it to authenticate twice. And if it's done through an app running on the same computer it will be basically the same as having one password anyway, only doubly annoying yet again. For now, if you can't afford an expensive solution that's highly cumbersome, just having two distinct passwords that you don't write down or use a password manager for, would be the safest and most secure method.
For me, I still don't have a GH account. Before Microsoft bought them I was roughly 75% against using them and roughly 90% after. When Copilot came about I was definitively in the 99.99999% no way, no how camp. Now with annoying MFA garbage that is still security theater, I'm in the 100% camp. If I ever open source any of my solo projects I'll have to rent a domain name and server space because I have the same concerns for GL that I had for GH before MS bought them.
1
-
Maybe I just need a better example to help me visualize generically how this could be applied because that link which talks about HTTP requests seems convoluted and full of too much boilerplate, which kind of seems like a natural negative consequence of how Rust implements enums. For instance, if I were implementing a mechanism to handle requests, I'd put everything in that one class, and there would be no need to return different structs or whatever.
This also kind of strikes me as one of the quirky flaws of method chaining because then you have to return different types to allow the chain to continue. Of course, since we're talking about HTTP requests, I'd probably just fill in default details and have functions to let the user replace the defaults or not if they shouldn't care. Certain things would obviously be an error, like a lack of target IP and so on, but there are things which the user might not want to care about, or shouldn't have to manually handle.
For instance, one of the things about the example that strikes me as wrong is the status codes being passed as magic numbers/strings instead of having a set of enumerated names so the user doesn't need to know the actual status code, such as just STATUS_OK instead of passing (200, "OK"). And on top of that the content length being set by the user passing anything at all. That's one of those things that would never be explicit in such a library were I writing it because the user could pass the wrong value and that's a huge flaw, where instead the library should calculate it for you and set it automatically.
The two examples he gives of where such things go wrong in C++ I agree with, but they're also kind of irrelevant. Sure, move semantics should probably be implemented better and more at the compiler level, but things like closing files really is better with RAII and it's just a matter of slightly modifying those classes. Of course, I don't agree that Rust actually makes these things easier or ergonomic as that code looks disgusting and makes me want to barf worse than reading STL code in C++.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Aside from NetHogs, I already knew about everything you mentioned. Back when I still used Windows, like 20+ years ago, I used GVim because the terminal version of Vim on Windows sucked and had all kinds of weird problems. I'm sure it doesn't now, but I haven't used it in over 2 decades, so who knows. I haven't bothered to look at the source for ripgrep yet, but I can't use it because it doesn't correctly handle several parts of RE that I use on a regular basis. It's super fast, but it doesn't find what I'm looking for often. Truthfully, I find it's faster and easier to just use grep paired with find, because I can restrict what I'm searching for in a more complex way. Like searching shell scripts, but only when they're executable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It still weirds me out how many leftists are finding themselves in the "center" because everything has moved so far to the left. And by that I mean you're not a centrist and I hope you don't think of yourself as one, but the ruling class has just moved that far to the left that they've left sanity behind. Far too many believe the lie of "far right", but it's nearly never a true moniker. People don't ignore the bias, they imbibe it, unfortunately, and thus for all the thousands of lies the media tells, most people still believe them even in the face of evidence to the contrary. The more I see the more I think that the only way for humanity to survive is to wipe out all the media, and that would include the highly biased Wikipedia editors. The reasoning is that they're negatively impacting the world with every lie they tell which thousands of people believe, and it's causing people to die. We need a counter to that, to allow those speaking the truth to have free speech instead of allowing big tech and the media to censor them. Absent such a control, and given the government support of leftism, a grassroots movement to wipe out the liars is the only course of action left to the people. Unfortunately, again, those of "good conscience" don't want to take action. They'd rather sit back and wait for death like a coward than save humanity.
1
-
I think a mix of both would be good. It kind of seems like a good argument for the way Windows has its various subsystems organized. Like the Win32 stuff is split up, with GDI and whatnot. Basically it would make Linux a bit more consistent overall, and if it were an API and designed right from the start, you could swap components on a whim like now, but it would look cleaner. Also, I think I get why people are so insane about tiling on desktops now, because when I need to move an app around, I don't bother clicking the title bar. Used to be that KDE had it setup so you'd hit alt, but now they allow you to customize the key, so I use the WinKey, hold that then click anywhere in the window and drag it wherever I want. Right click and I can resize it and it's super fast and easy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm pretty sure you don't read these comments, but I'll say it anyway. First, I don't know why you're reacting to a video that's just over a year old. Second, he's absolutely correct that JavaScript ruined the web, but not for most of the reasons cited. Yes, there are bloated frameworks and that's one of many problems, but the fact that many of the standards committees thought that JavaScript would fix deficiencies in HTML and CSS and thus never amended them to make them better is a huge problem. The fact that you can't just use a standard img tag and get good performance and instead have to use an alternate solution is a huge part of the problem there too. JavaScript is garbage and TypeScript which merely transpiles to it is also garbage. Neither language is any good at this point in time and should probably just be wiped off the face of the Earth, along with HTML and CSS.
Now, for the statement on Linux, it's an operating system that requires more intelligence than your average JS developer, so if you can't merely upgrade to a new OS version, that's entirely on you. I've had no problems upgrading my OS many versions throughout the past 25+ years of using Linux. And yes, I mean without a full reinstall. That's not to say that you aren't allowed to do it that way if you want, or that when you're a new user you won't ever make such a mistake, but that at this late stage in the game, unless you're doing something really funky, you shouldn't have problems.
I also want to specifically hit upon the argument for Electron. I completely disagree regarding dev time and effort when it comes to Electron versus desktop. If you're a more complete developer then you should have at least a modicum of experience in making a desktop app and there are numerous cross platform UI libraries that it should be easy to build a desktop app out. Hell, you could even use Win32 API and just run WINE on Linux, and we all know how many tools there are to generate code for Windows UI. However, wasting CPU cycles to use Electron instead of building a proper desktop app because you're lazy is a huge problem in the industry and far too prevalent of an attitude.
I figured I'd add this in since no one will read it anyway, but the current version of Rust I have installed is 1.77 which I downloaded by cloning the repo and building. The entire folder takes up 19GB of disk space. Previous versions, before deleting them in full and starting from scratch because their build system is garbage, have gotten as high as 32GB. Every time I update it I wipe it out and start from scratch on building, which is fine because the binaries are in my home folder, so I can still build the latest version using the prior version, and from scratch always takes a full hour to build. So anyone who thinks that adding a requirement of the Rust runtime and build tools to a project is insane. It's a garbage language, like JavaScript, with a garbage build system, like JavaScript, and no one should use either language.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@undeadblizzard Sure, tax money goes to schools, infrastructure and emergency services, all kinds of things that people either need or will eventually, but it also goes to all kinds of things that it should not go to. Things like studies on animal poop and mating habits of whatever tiny creature undeservedly gets the funding. Way more money is wasted than spent where it belongs. Further, the Federal Reserve should not print as much money as it wants, as each time they do so without destroying an equal amount of pre-existing money it increases inflation. It's not the only means of causing inflation, but it is one that is very direct and shouldn't be allowed to happen. Most government that exists is a waste and shouldn't exist. And if you think that it's someone else's job to protect you at all times then you're either rich like Pelosi or you're ignorant to the real world. A cop will take 5 minutes to reach you while the person attacking you will take less than 1. Police realistically are only here to investigate after the fact and punish those responsible. Given what schools push these days, you'd be better off home schooling your children, unless you don't know what makes a woman a woman. Clearly tax money isn't going towards all roads as we have so many toll roads these days. Emergency services in general, but specifically fire and medical, are the only thing you brought up that genuinely makes any sense in your argument, and that shouldn't cost as much as it does.
1
-
@chickensandwich8808 I'd actually prefer if the rich didn't pay their fair share, because then they'd be paying less. We have a graduated tax system precisely because people don't believe in a fair share for the rich. Sure, there are a lot of rich who start businesses and pay a lot of sales tax by buying a lot of products which helps fund the government, and sure they even will employ a lot of employees which gives people income so they can live, and sure those people will then buy things and the sales tax from that will help fund the government more, but those that just sit on it and invest it, umm, well, okay, so banks will then loan people who need it money at some point, and if there's more invested the banks will have more to loan. Wait, why should I hate rich people again? There are a fair few like Pelosi who are super corrupt and use insider trading to earn their money and then contribute nothing back, but most of them are politicians or ex-politicians or the family of politicians and/or ex-politicians. You also have the children of businessmen, who I suppose we should hate for not earning the money that they've been handed. Yeah, because jealousy is a great motivation in life. Or maybe we'll just point out the corrupt business practices of Apple and Amazon and Google, because those are the only businesses that exist, right!? It's not like the statistics show that small businesses employ the most people and pay the most in taxes, or is it?! Nah, let's just keep hating the few rich people that screw us all because we don't understand the economy or how anything works. Got it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, I've said it before, you know it, I love KDE. I don't need tiling because I either open everything full screen or let kwin "tile" my terminals if I leave them at the default. However, I've been embracing tabs in vim so I've been full screening it more and using windows and tabs kind of works, but I've also been trying tiling shortcuts. I know, sounds counterintuitive, but if I become dependent on it I may install Bismuth. And I've said it before, I've got a global shortcut for every app I use on a daily basis.
Something that might help you with losing windows, consider each desktop/workspace as its own category. For me, I put YT tabs on D4 so no matter where I'm currently at I can navigate instantly to that window, and I put my music player on D12 so I can navigate to it instantly as well, but I also have media keys so I almost never go to D12 except to manually play a specific song in the list. I often forget to close it when I log out and it winds up on D1 later, but a simple Win+Ctrl+F12 and it's where it belongs.
1
-
1
-
Not that I believe you'll read this, or anyone else for that matter, but I gave this video a dislike for one reason. You stated in an indirect manner that you think guns should be registered with the government. This is a huge part of what's wrong with the mentality of some Canadians. As a living being with free will, you have every right to defend yourself against threats, whether that be a thief or your own government, and as part of that defense you have every right to be armed exactly as well, if not better, than that would-be threat. To even suggest that law abiding citizens with guns should be tracked as a dangerous threat to society when criminals can not thusly be tracked is willfully ignorant. If you want to abdicate your responsibility for your own safety onto the government who will only arrive after the criminal has had their way with you, go for it, but do not advocate for others to do the same. You should pay attention to the news more and see how gun control does not work, as Europe and Asia have repeatedly shown. The problem is that violence will not be curbed by banning those who are willing and able to defend themselves from having the most effective means of doing so. Education is what is needed, educating people in sympathy and empathy and responsibility for their actions.
1
-
You probably won't read this and YouTube probably won't send a notification anyway, and the post will likely be shadowed, but I'll tell you why I dislike this entire take. First of all, every argument for Rust is only valid if you're a new programmer and/or a bad programmer. The disingenuous argument that paper makes relating to "bug finding tools" applies even more so to Rust because the compiler doesn't catch nearly as many bugs as the static analysis tools for C, which are far more mature and feature complete, and there are exceedingly few dynamic analysis tools for Rust which mostly don't exist and would need to be written from scratch. The majority of dynamic analysis for Rust consists of bounds checking which slows the code down. You might say, "but you can turn it off", and then it's no better than C dynamically and there are C compilers which can add bounds checking anyway, but here's the kicker, that's a stupid feature anyway because the real problem with most code is the lack of proper user input checks. You can easily work with strings in C if you properly check user input, and using only numbers won't fix improper checks. Rust won't fix bad code, nor will it make a good programmer better. At best it'll force bad programmers to clean up their act. I know I'm yelling at clouds with this because the government is run by morons and it's going to happen whether I want my tax dollars wasted on it or not, and it won't matter in another decade or two when humanity destroys itself, but it still irks me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kerryrowles5217 I'm not sure I understand that adage, but there's one right that I don't see in his list which it appears no one has mentioned, the right to life. Part of the responsibility of humans is in defending your own right to life as well as that of others. In the US, most people, as in those that don't live in leftist controlled areas where the laws shit on your rights, well, most people can defend themselves from someone attacking them. I've noticed that people in the UK, Canada, New Zealand and Australia, don't seem to have those rights, at all. Do you and any others from Australia believe that you have a right to life? If so, how can you change your laws to respect that right?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
While my main language is C, and that's certainly not going anywhere, I've been keeping up my skills in about 10 other languages. As I've been writing compilers and other such programs for the majority of the past 25 years, I see things from a different perspective than other developers. The way I see it is that C++ and Rust are basically the same language with all of the same solutions, except that Rust chose defaults that directly oppose C++'s chosen defaults, and it chose a syntax which is less consistent and to my mind uglier, and they chose to prevent certain types of solutions based on them merely seeming hinky.
So while C++ by default isn't necessarily considered safe, the programmer can write their code correctly and even take extra steps to ensure that their code is safer for others to extend their work. However, tooling has existed for decades now which enables programmers to be sloppy and check their work the way `rustc` does, and even add on extra checks that `rustc` doesn't do.
Also, the 70% figure is an unwitting lie on Microsoft's part because they're expressing the effect, not the cause. The cause of at least 95% of all bugs, in any user facing software anyway, is that of a failure to check user input. Inadequate and/or incomplete checks are still a failure to check user input.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Forced arbitration clauses should be illegal. You can't change "contracts" like these, and fully opting out is generally your only option. Of course, if they have a unique service or product that you really feel you need, then you're forced into accepting terms that basically prevent you from correcting a wrong, which in itself is wrong. I can wholly understand the desire to not be sued, especially if it's a class-action, but that's a part of operating a business, especially if you commit acts of evil like they do.
On the "Plus" side, they've convinced me to never sign up for any Disney service ever because they might use an expired agreement to prevent me from suing them for whatever they might do wrong. I doubt I'd ever have a need to sue them, even if I used their services or attended their parks, but it's still my right and I don't want it stolen by legalistic maneuvering.
Also, while I've never been to any Disney park, I can assure you that Six Flags is far more fun and I still miss AstroWorld.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Wait, I thought you said you weren't a normie? There are more than two root distros or DE's or WM's. I've been using Slackware with KDE for 25+ years now and it's a nearly perfect system. I've had significantly fewer crashes than when I used Windows, and I've had a significantly easier desktop experience with KDE than other people on other systems have. It's because of KDE's ease of setting shortcuts and multiple desktop feature that in all this time I've never felt the need to have a second monitor. I still game too, and I don't need Windows to do so. In fact I don't even use Windows and haven't installed it on any computer in about 25 years. The only caveat on gaming is that I refuse to buy or play any game that uses AC as it's just a rootkit for your computer. Sure, Proton works well, and if you've ever seen Muta you know that a VM is also a possibility these days if it won't work natively even with Proton, but it's the principle of the matter for me.
Seriously, if you haven't tried Linux the correct way, either by using a newbie friendly distro like Fedora or Mint, then try again with the in-between distro Slackware. The only advice you need to get it up and running is to use GRUB instead of the recommended ELILO, and look up Alien aka Eric Hameleers on the website and read the instructions for integrating the packages he builds and use some of those, but don't waste bandwidth by trying to download everything at once because they still have crap servers.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I've been a Linux user for over 25 years. However, where others have had problems, it's always been easy for me because I use the most common hardware. I still don't play modern games, and the most recently released game that I've played in the past decade has been Psychonauts, and not the Steam release, but the console version with an emulator. I have never had a discrete graphics card and I might never. And I recommend KDE to everyone that swaps over because it's still the best desktop environment there is. If you're a new user, setting up all the virtual desktops and keyboard shortcuts is relatively easy even if a tad tedious, and once you're done you can backup all your config files and copy to subsequent installs as needed.
Although, I will admit that in the past it was easier to setup the boot loader for Linux, before we were infected with the curse of UEFI. Even ELILO won't work for me now, but GRUB isn't bad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I doubt anyone will read this, but I'll put it here just in case. Machine learning is just a collection of algorithms, so it's no different than using algorithms to solve equations, except now what's happening is algorithms that are less specific are being used to statistically analyze data to generically solve other problems. CPU's and GPU's are essentially the same thing, except that CPU's are more generic in how they're implemented and with the types of problems they solve and while GPU's have less functionality overall they parallelize it to an insane degree more. Eric Schmidt mentions briefly something that should scare everyone, that the people doing the research want to instill their own leftist values into the technology, which if they ever create real generic machine intelligence with their research will be an end to the human race.
However, this all brings me to the true dangers of the technology, and why I don't believe we'll ever reach real generic machine intelligence. This is my attempt to warn people, but I know no one will heed the warning and eventually humanity will cease to exist, so I'm not sure why I still have even a tiny inkling of hope, but I guess I do. The real danger of such technology will not be what it can do on its own, because it'll never develop to the point of acting unilaterally the way a human or any other sentient being can. The real danger will be of a psychopathic individual with sufficient intelligence to meld multiple technologies and use it to automate the process of killing people.
We already have the technology to recognize what is present in a photograph because of Google, and thanks to ChatGPT, voice recognition software and a host of other technologies, we can even use them in conjunction with each other to perform complex tasks at the mere utterance of words from an operator. It's only a matter of time, due to the lack of morals being taught to children in today's society, before someone attaches weaponry of any variety onto a drone and hooks it into some computer running their own instance of an open source "AI" program to start the process of killing everyone. With the right manufacturing setup they can produce drones with relative ease and speed and even have resource collector drones to draw in materials to produce more. Once the process is underway they could sit back and watch the world burn.
There is no legislation that can fix this. Only massive societal restructuring. It would require that leftism be rooted out and morals and ethics be taught to children again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's not just a skill issue, it's a knowledge issue too. There are tools that have existed for decades to do all that rustc can do and then some, but if you don't know they exist, your skill will languish. The thing that I really find weird about this is that Ridiculous Fish was one of the people I used to talk to on a regular basis on Yahoo chat. Back then he was working for Apple and used Objective C for nearly every project, he even wrote a chat client using it. I can't say that change is bad if it means growth, but here it just means swapping to a new language that they don't know any better than they did C++. They should've just stuck with C, and used the tools available if they were having skill issues, but whatever, I don't use Fish and probably never will. Still, I miss talking with most of those guys, even that weird Malaysian guy who for some reason loved Java.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As a C programmer, I'd say you're correct about it being relative. I would call C89 low level, C99 mid level and C11 and C17 both high level. Scripting language is a subjective term because any language can be interpreted or compiled and even in between. The difference would be in how it's commonly used. The majority of people use the default setup for Python which compiles it to a bytecode prior to running it through its VM. So it would be an in between language, as would Java. The majority of people compile C, C++, Pascal et al. before running them, so we tend to refer to them as compiled languages, but they don't have to be. TCC comes close to achieving in between status for C, though not quite. BASIC is a common example of interpreted, but as QB 4.5 and beyond show us, it too can be compiled.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not that you'll read this, especially on a 10 day old video, but the thing I most object to is calling it AI. All of these NN-based learning models are incorrectly formed attempts at duplicating human minds, something that isn't currently within the technological capability of humans yet, if ever. I say incorrectly formed because that's not really how human minds work. I also vehemently dislike the hype train behind "AI", but I think artists need to chill out and get over it. Yeah, the technology basically just regurgitates what others have done before, and anyone that claims otherwise doesn't actually understand how the programs work. It's a bit like mad libs with significantly many more inputs and outputs and a lot more fine-grained control over how they interact, even the art generator programs. I doubt that there's much new art to be had in this day and age, but if there is, human artists with actual skills can still compete if they learn how licensing works. If you can't create something new and unique, then are you any better than the generative programs anyway.
All that said, the only places I think "AI" programs should be banned are in automation systems for censorship and in writing programs. The former should be obvious as to why, but the latter is because a human still needs to check the correctness of that generated program and if it ever goes into a piece of software that manages real life machinery which can lead to a person's death, it will guaranteed cause someone to die.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dorkangel1076 If you're religious, then take whatever religious text you believe in and read it because all the major religions say it's a sin, and if you're not religious, then basic logic tells us that from an evolutionary standpoint it's something that won't allow our species to survive and is thus not going to be something that will be a natural trait, especially at the levels we've been seeing it. But then your side has always been anti-science, so we'll disregard logic. And whether you intended it or not, orientation is something that's chosen, so for you to call it that means, at least subconsciously, that you agree. Now, as for bigotry against orientation, why are you bigoted against straight people who further the population?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Interesting. Although, I think if the Chinese had taken over the world instead of the Europeans, we'd be a lot worse off in some ways as a civilization, and in some ways better off. For one, education would be better, but much harder. If communism would have infected them after they took over the world then the population would be less than half of what it is now, potentially a lot less. Also, since the European system was at least based off of a particular religion, moral values were eventually instilled in a lot of the people spreading it around the world. I'm not sure if slavery would have ever ended without that basis, regardless of how long, but I'm sure there will be people to claim it would've ended sooner despite the lack of compassion that Chinese society has had for generations and the fact that they still have slaves to this day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As to the schools, that's because they're run almost entirely by leftists these days. They're mental midgets who give participation trophies to ensure that no one is special because everyone is. Technical subjects shouldn't be taught by these creatures because they don't know what anything means or how anything works, they just want things to work on unicorn farts and sprinkles.
As to the issue of mainframes using Cobol, the financial institutions that use them want something that is solid, not something that will need debugging and they're smart enough to see that new code is often garbage. Also, they don't like spending money where they don't need to, and since the old code works, why spend money to replace it with something untested and untrusted. So if you want to make serious bank, yeah, learn Cobol. If you want to make fun programs that millions know they're using and might make you good money, learn C++. If you want to make useful programs that people know they're using but might not make you good money, then learn C. No one will know you wrote it if you use Cobol, but billions will use it, so if you want fortune but no fame, then go the Cobol route.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I hope you're successful in this endeavor, but you should note that a mod chip is technically illegal thanks to the DMCA which makes circumvention of their protection mechanisms the specific task that you're not allowed to do. It effectively does an end-run around precedent from the Supreme Court that allows for reverse engineering. Worse yet, the Supreme Court has even reiterated that reverse engineering is legal even after the DMCA passed. So, while I would still say do it, the legality is murky at best. However, all that said, if we all made the move to generate our own electricity, say with solar panels and wind generators, then we could bankrupt the corrupt electricity companies and force a real change for the better. In the case of people living in apartments they'd have to band together for the greater good, which is really tough to get people to cooperate on, but would be a necessary step.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@crissiandco I hate to break it to you guys, but boycotts don't actually work. With 7 billion people on this planet, every business can find enough customers. The only reason any go bankrupt is complete corruption or stupidity. If you manufacture a product, guaranteed there will be enough people, who want it, and don't care about politics, to buy that product and keep you in business.
Another hard truth you all need to learn and take to heart, nearly every company is woke. You'd have an easier time making a list of companies that are not woke to buy products from because you could probably count them all using just the fingers on your hands, and in this instance thumbs don't count as fingers.
If you really want to protest against wokeness, make your own *everything*, because otherwise you will at some point be giving your money to people who either don't care if you die or who are actively trying to kill you. That includes the government, by the way.
1
-
1
-
1
-
My root drive has 33gb used and that's for nearly every app I've installed, but that's traditional package management, mostly, and a very tiny amount of AppImages. Now, why do I say nearly? Because I've got some non-traditional package management as well, rust currently takes up 17gb, which is after wiping its entire folder and installing from scratch because it was up to 30gb last time around. And I've got a lot of source folders for software I've built myself, and for the most part generated a system package with dynamic linking and installed using the system package manager. I can't actually use FlatPak's on my system because I couldn't get it to build and haven't cared enough to try a second time. I'm not entirely sure how much space is actually eaten up by all the programs I use because they're all over the place, Games sorted into a separate directory, nearly everything else is in Downloads, but I've also got a lot of .iso's and random junk in there too. Just du'd it and 201gb in my Downloads folder with only 2.1gb of that in gcc. Though, this is a fresh clone because when fully built it was around 9gb.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@silak33 I'm not assuming anything about someone who might be using a program to create files. Generally that's what most software that most people complain about is doing. Granted firmware often doesn't, but open firmware does also exist. So even if someone isn't using software to create files, they may be using it to read them, and open formats facilitate using whatever firmware you want.
I think here you have a misconception about what open source really is. It doesn't mean free as in beer, and it doesn't always mean free as in speech. In fact, look at Unreal Engine for an example of neither. One might be tempted to call it free as in beer if you're doing a tiny project, but once you make money you have to pay for it, and you certainly can't redistribute your changes under a different license. Further, there are at least hundreds of full time developers, possibly thousands, that are actually paid to contribute to open source, Linus being one of them. Look at companies like Red Hat for inspiration on companies paying to either have open source code written or to offer technical support for use of open source.
As to the flight planning software, that's quite the rabbit hole. Obviously you must not be a developer, or you'd at least be able to give it a go extending one of the numerous open source programs. I would never have thought that anyone outside of the government would have a need or desire for such software, but apparently there's a lot. I see that there's even some done by companies that pay to contribute to open source.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Right, so capitalism is evil, even though it's the system that we've always had as a basis and which allowed us to grow in civilization and technology to the point where today we have the highest quality of life of any generation that came before. Socialism and its fraternal twin communism, if you foolishly think they're different, have set us back and killed massive quantities of people. It's funny how you bring up a system which you think would work, yet claim it isn't a capitalism, only to describe it working exactly as capitalism does. Barter breaks down, at least that much you acknowledge, and that's why monetary systems exist. Competition is only a portion of capitalism, and it's not a bad part either. If you wish to cry foul at nature, which is full of competition and unfairness, go right ahead, but you're still wrong if you think you can subvert nature and yet have society flourish. Competition leads to developing new solutions. It leads to growth. Most important of all, it leads to real diversity, not the fake garbage they teach in indoctrination centers these days.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You're right, it's definitely a big deal, and I completely agree with all of your reasoning therein. The one point I disagree with you on is the bit about Google copying Java. I don't know if you remember, or if you're old enough to, although you should know of the project's existence anyway, but Sun, the original developer of Java, open sourced it back in the mid aughts. The project OpenJDK is the open source continuation of that code, pre-Oracle-buyout. Also, the case that Oracle brought regarding the use of their API, they did in fact lose that case. Granted, it did set a stupid precedent, that API's are copyrightable, but they rejected the claim that Google violated that. Modern Android basically just runs Java applets anyway, but the form has been heavily modified to optimize it, and the runtime is most definitely not the JVM. I'd love to see an open standard for computers, both mobile and desktop, where I could generate some bytecode and it really could run everywhere.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I think that Java was ahead of its time with the idea of compiling to a generic bytecode and running in a VM, but the implementation was still done wrong. The language itself is far too verbose, it's basically a less utile C++, and truthfully, computers at the time weren't capable of running it adequately. Now it's perfectly fine, but GC languages are in general a bad thing. I'd love to see someone come up with a non-GC language that compiles to a generic bytecode and has a "VM" that generates a native binary on the first-run. Sort of like C#, but not a garbage clone of Java that's worse than what it cloned. Languages with "unsafe" keywords are beyond stupid. Programming is unsafe, and if you don't know what you're doing, you probably shouldn't be programming.
I expect you'll disagree with this, but you have to admit that there are far too many programmers that really should be in a different field these days. Far too many people have gotten into programming because they saw people making a lot of money and they wanted in on it, but they have no desire to be good at it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
At this point I know no one will respond, but yeah, all crypto currency is a scam. Of course, so is fiat currency that's not backed by anything real, such as gold. One might be inclined to say that all of our cash money is backed by gold, but that's simply not true, and the current inflation is proving that it's not properly backed. If I did the math I could have some exact figures, but at a guess I'd say it's probably 75% of its printed value, maybe even lower. In short, invest in useful things and ignore cash, it only has value while the government still exists.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@linkernick5379 Rust doesn't solve the problem of cross-platform problems. They've explicitly stated a minimum CPU that it'll run on for x86 machines which means it won't run on half the desktops I have and then they target SBC's. It's just stupid is what it is and they're merely slapping people in the face. C is far more cross-platform capable, even if it requires you to use a configure script to make it easy, it'll still run on really old platforms that Rust gives the middle finger to. And nothing is more interoperable with C than C. As for safe {insert X}, that's BS. It makes you work harder to be unsafe, making it an even more intentional decision to be so, but it doesn't make you safe as a blanket statement. You have always had the option in C, and intelligent programmers have taken that option, to write libraries of code that you reuse which abstract a lot of things making future code that you write as safe as can be. Who in their right mind rewrites linked list code whenever they need it in a project instead of just using the code they already wrote, if you even use a simple linked list anyway. And finally, defining the tooling that every programmer will use to interact with your language is a really stupid idea. It creates a vague understanding of the underlying way in which the code will work and makes it impossible to replace in the future. Using LLVM as they do is a pretty cheap way to push out a new language, but that further has them depending on a separate project while they're attempting to define the tooling and they still restrict it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If there's one thing that has been pounded into me over and over again throughout the years, it's that new trendy languages are meant for people that don't actually understand how computers work and don't know how to program. Unfortunately, the lies told by the designers get perpetuated and a vast quantity of people get tricked into using these languages, and thus what should have been a couple of months of trending turn into a decade. Sometimes they even mutate into unholy monsters that take over the world like JavaScript, or they take over a few fields like Python, but even the somewhat niche languages still get used far more than they should. I've never seen a cult this strong though, and the more I learn of this language the more I realize the collective intelligence of the world has gone down a significant amount. Like channel names that are a lie such as "no boilerplate" while demonstrating that this language still has plenty of it and in some cases more than C++. Or that the borrow checker is the greatest thing in the world because it prevents memory leaks while that only applies if the entirety of your code is written in the language, and even then it's still not assured, no matter what the designers guarantee. Of course that also neglects the fact that you have to use all kinds of extra machinery to be able to share data without forcing copies all over the place. Something which C++ doesn't suffer from because it has a simpler syntax here, and that sounds so strange and I'd never thought I'd say such a thing, but here we are. I keep hoping that humanity will grow up and get more intelligent, but the opposite seems to be happening, and Rust's rise to prominence is just another sign of the times.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Interesting, but why NeoVim instead of vanilla Vim? All I seem to get out of people when I ask is that they like the plugins, or that configuration can be done with Lua. Both answers seem wrong, and the first seems especially wrong if you hate IDE's. I've literally only ever used one plugin in all the decades I've been using Vim, and it was written in VimScript, and it's just to enhance tabbing. It hasn't been updated once in the entire time I've been using it, if the original author has updated it anyway. As to the other answer of configuring with Lua, well, there's nothing to prevent you from using vanilla Vim that way, and I always enable Lua when I build it. If you so desire you can also build Vim with Perl, Python, Ruby and TCL enabled. Since you say that you use Ruby, maybe give that a thought and build your own Vim with all the options you want enabled. Just don't forget mouse and system clipboard functionality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1