2,562 karma · joined June 21, 2024
The USA is supporting the same parties that they had to fight in WWII. I would think that repeating the same mistakes from the past and expecting different results is not a sane approach to politics.
To use C++ to code user programs is the actual mistake.
Think about assembly. Should assembly also be safe in all calls? That will make everything slower, and consume way more energy. Will you blame assembly if people used it to create a phone app and it had memory leaks? Or will you blame the developer for using assembly in the first place?
C++ is a tool designed for a range of purposes. There is a push to make it an universal language that makes everything well. But engineering is about making compromises.
For your use, C++ may be the wrong language. I do not disagree with you. But maybe you should be using another language instead. Or we should create a new language that fills the sweet spot that C++ covers, and then evolve C++ to be the safe language that you want. One way or another, it is a compromise.
Because these are not AI companies, these are infrastructure companies as their main source of revenue and cost is renting and building infrastructure.
Inequality gives a few people the resources to change the mind of millions. As far as inequality remains high, propaganda will shape the ideology of a big chunk of the population. That is not good for society.
They are not bizarre but a good compromise between consistency and optimization for any possible existing and future CPU architecture.
What the author correctly points out to is that GSL implementation does not remove that undefined behaviour as it lacks the proper checks. And that is the problem as it does not fulfill its own documented guarantees.
tldr; C++ is just fine. The implementation in the library is wrong.
My rant about this, not directed to the commenter but in general:
I wish people would have been so interested on discussing and planning with teammates like they seem with AI tools.
Because this is nothing new. Communication, knowing what you are doing, planning... was already a mandatory step for any engineering task.
And if people that use planning with AI then ignore their teammates, other teams, etc. then it is time to reconsidering their way of working.
Other countries have a say about it.
They are aristocrats. They are worried about accumulating more power then their peers, about alliances to gain that power, and about projecting an image of infallibility.
Aristocracy has never been known for caring for economics, technology or practical matters. They just care about power. Ruining nations, building useless vanity projects and going to war is kind of their main thing.
That would not be a big problem. But the next Republican president may be even worse than Trump. Trump is just the symptom of a deeper corruption problem.
That things will fix themselves when Trump is not in the White House anymore is a dangerous misconception.
It would help if the power grid was public property, thou. It would help if the power grid was build so the majority of citizens profit. It would help if the power grid was build for someone else than big tech.
Meanwhile building railroads is impossible. Could we convince AI companies to build their datacenters on trains? USA would have in a few years the largest train network in the world.
The old, what is better for the rich VS what is better for society.
My advice is not to always discuss in public, but that companies should encourage that behaviour and punish toxic management.
You made a very good point.
This is the main reason that most abuse happens in companies. Discussions are kept private so nobody can add 1+1 and see how toxic are certain bosses.
This also enables misalignments and lies. I have seen bosses that are will say one thing to one employee and a different one to the next and even a different one upwards to leadership.
Lack of transparency is a red flag for any company. Some personal matters can be discussed privately, but when all discussions are private abuse and chaos are guranteed.
They have fight open source and open standards for so long that it is in their DNA.
Open source and standards are the best most efficient solution, but proprietary platforms have the money to buy politicians and create FUD in the development community.
A big part of the current political situation is derived from platforms owning the public discourse and profiting from human attention.
A world of open standards and open software is a better world.
When I was a kid there were fines for factories that polluted water. Most of the time they were not found out, and when they did they just paid the fine that it was cheaper than to solve the problem.
Regulations changed, factories that polluted water got closed until they fixed the problem. Most factory owners fear the regulation, they are extremely pro-active to avoid breaking the law because the consequences are not worth it. (This trend reversed a decade ago when punishments started to be less harsh and government became more pro-business using the euphemism for corrupt)
It is possible to reign in Meta. Parents should be angry enough to bring governments down for letting tech treat their children as products. When citizens are angry change happens and becomes unavoidable.
Most companies software should not move fast and break things but it should be stable, provide the functionality that their users require and stability is a great asset.
Apache software is reliable in a way that many modern things are not(looking at you platforms like Android, Facebook, etc.).
It is 10 years too late to trust Meta on anything.
How they know? ;)
To keep everybody around you healthy makes the probability of caching a disease lower for yourself, too.
Grooming behaviour in primates helps in the same way. And it is so important that it is linked to all kinds of mental rewards.
To let disease run amok in your own neighborhood it would be very costly.
It is an ideology based in short-term self interest. It is the way toddlers think about the world before growing up.
Laws should help to create a well functioning society where everybody can participate and benefit from it in a fair system. Regulations are part of a functional society.
Digital ownership is not different from anything else. Regulate it correctly or the most powerful people will just take away everything from you.
That is horrifying and destroys jobs, removes expertise from the world, and makes our lives worse.
I do not see how AI could be a net positive either.
I prefer to be paid 150 than be paid 130 and my colleague 110. It is stupid to have as a goal to earn more than you colleagues. Your goal should be to maximize your own pay.
Move fast and break things have changed to be about technology and it is now about the law. Uber popularized the trend, now everybody does the same. AI breaking copyright law is just part of that trend.
With the new "laws are for losers" mentality we are in for a hard time.
When I was a kid, the valuation of a company was based on the amount of profit that it did taking into account the cost of getting it.
The day that the USA abandoned capitalism for speculative-finance was a bad day for the world economy.
The current Pentagon leadership is the kind of people that buy thousands of books with public money that nobody will read (written by their friends).
- "Ender’s Game, Orson Scott Card" is the only one from the list I have read.
- "This Kind of War: The Classic Korean War History, by T. R. Fehrenbach" seems interesting. South Korea still seems very grateful to the USA and commemorates the USA (and the rest of allies) that helped them during the Korean war.
It is part of the global trend to "rent everything, own nothing".
High inequality means that everybody wants to sell to the hyper-rich individuals and corporations. And selling products and services to the working class is a losing money endebour.
So, money accumulation means asset accumulation, that means more renting, that means more money...
The industry should only be allowed to comment after the laws have been written and fulfill the goals of European citizens.
To ask the fox to guard the hen house is killing democracy.
It is the business model. There is an incentive to make games addictive. Like arcade games the goal is to keep kids as much time on the machine as possible. But now the arcade is in your pocket 24/7.
Even worse, there is an incentive even to just open the app as it is an opportunity to show you an Ad. Notifications, and periodical rewards make sure that there is a constant need to interact with the phone.
Unregulated markets will always end up in scams and addiction. Because both are the fastest and more reliable way of getting money.