JulianMorrison

This will end up without wheels and with its frame kicked bent.

Given that Go modules can depend on private interfaces that specify only the methods they need, dependency injection of the pass-dependencies-to-the-constructor style seems almost built in. Not automated as such, but easy.

Steel in particular softens at a much lower temperature than it melts. And it doesn't need to soften much to make a really long thin drill bit bend.

If they have any sense they'll be wearing NBC suits and filtering respirators.

They (or their leadership) may not have any sense.

I'm guessing it depends on the kind of sanctions. If dealing with rogues makes you a rogue, internationally, then CIPS may shy away from it.

Trouble is that those statistics are educated guesses. It's not like we have a precise table of fractional causes that could be split up via dice rolls. The first thing the lawyers for the factory would do is challenge the probability estimates.

Another way of putting it would be "pretty simple and quick - if you can achieve a completely infeasible number of qubits".

That is to say, it's an algorithmic overhang, the knowledge how is available but held back by not knowing how to achieve the hardware needed.

The risk being that someone could discover "how to make qubits" tomorrow, and although (because it's hardware) it might take a short while to turn that into an industrial qubit pipeline, we don't yet actually know yet that it's mechanically impossible to do.

Looks similar to the fluffy ice that forms on wood and was recently discovered to be caused by a fungus.

From the language reference

> Constant expressions may contain only constant operands and are evaluated at compile time.

and a "const" can only be defined with a constant expression.

So the difference would be that a "val" can be assigned a value that is evaluated at runtime.

Yes, it is an implementation choice. I feel it's a choice that makes sense, too. But regardless, it's how things work right now in Go.

Fair point. "value" and "var" then, perhaps?

I think it was Fortran which introduced the equivalence between programming variables (that are a mutable piece of memory) and mathematical variables (which describe a relationship). But they aren't really the same. And "variable" has become too fixed in computer science usage to be repaired back to its earlier mathematical meaning.

Thankfully the people who make Go do care about conceptual muddles.

That wasn't exactly what I meant. What I meant was

- as of right now they are different, and clearly distinct, and it's actually important to unlearn thinking of a const as a var, because they don't do the same thing in practical terms

- that proposal would muddy the distinction.

No, they are very different conceptually.

- A const is an abstracted value.

- A variable is an allocated piece of memory.

> Alternatively, Go 2.0 could implement "frozen" global variables

A more general change would be to implement the "var" and "val" distinction that exists in some languages.

    const x = 1 // x is a compile time alias for the untyped abstract number 1
    var x := 1  // define x at runtime to be (int)1, x is mutable
    val x := 1  // define x at runtime to be (int)1, x is immutable

Then the globals can be defined with "val".

Detection means there is enough virus physically present in the sample for the detection technology to identify it.

Infection requires virus particles to be physically present in transmission vectors (fluids, droplets, etc). There's generally also a dose-response effect where more particles means more chance of evading the immune system well enough to establish replication in the victim.

So a lack of anything to detect, means a lack of anything to spread an infection.

I wonder if this will improve prospects for battery-electric aviation? (It might not, if it's let down by energy density, for example.)

It's capturing money.

Now what happens if you pass it a string without a null byte terminator?

Yup, same, I'm 45 and I never heard of the stuff.

At a guess, you had to be in the generation that actually watched the Goon Show.

I don't think so. He's published stuff with them since [1] but not on the same topic.

1. https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/research/reports/

Perhaps someone has been reading Anders Sandberg[1]?

1. https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/brain-emulation-roadmap-report.pdf

Anti-competitive practise. If they make entering your resume suck, maybe you will only do it on one site (theirs).

Other thoughts: pure blue is a colour that is representable even in very old colour computers. It's also the only readable pure colour. (I'm guessing, human eyes see it badly, so it intrinsically looks "dark" at full brightness.)

EVs make the polluting energy sources fungible - you no longer have to modify the car to replace them with something better.

Very unfortunately, "a lot of people are dissatisfied with how things are going" is a circumstance which has a strong tendency to directly cause totalitarianism and authoritarianism. They vote for a Charismatic Guy who will Sweep Aside Loopholes and Smash the Evildoers.

From the comments on Charlie's site, and not by me:

Wyvernsridge | January 9, 2022 19:06 | Reply 8:

I love these kinds of posts! I would, however, caution about thinking that the end of ICE car manufacturing will be dictated solely by government diktat. It will most likely come earlier and more chaotically because of manufacturers being unable to source parts and components to continue making those cars.

The auto industry is basically a pyramid where OEMs [ie the car companies] depend on module/system [Tier1] suppliers as well as component suppliers [Tier 2] and Parts suppliers [Tier 3]. Those relationships are built on contracts that span out to five years and beyond. Today, contracts are being negotiated for 2025-2030. Those contracts, if happening at all, are being done for much lower quantities of units. After all, an EV does not need a cast-aluminium gearbox assembly. The manufacturers within those tiers are highly competitive among themselves and they know they need to find alternative to manufacture and remain viable well in advance of 2030. For OEMs this means trouble finding components, and paying much higher prices for those than they used to [ie the suppliers are costing in the risks]. This means that ICE car prices will skyrocket at the same time that EV prices go mainstream.

I could see both those lobbies being much reduced after the EV changeover.

One which can be obtained the good way, or the bad way, yes. EVs will reduce pressure to allow damaging pipelines and shale oil.