11,987 karma · joined June 10, 2010
Why would you do that?
> n fact, this is so common that Rust doesn’t require you to write the lifetimes explicitly
This is an actual _pattern_? Yikes^2.
The mixer is a separate device.
> it's a file and you can write to it!
Which means you don't need any special software or tooling to use it. So you can automate actions with it using scripts in ways that any other desktop system won't do for you nearly as easily.
> all you need to do is write a turing complete configuration file.
Welcome to "general purpose" computing. Go back 50 years and see what the alternatives were. Or check out Plan 9 to see the file concept taken to a much better conclusion.
This article relates to "hidden dangers of cookware." If he was talking about the vagaries of the solar cycle on Mars, I'd be on your side, as it is, this comes across as reflexive gatekeeping.
> Do people on this site now just read the headlines and then come to comment their stream of consciousness based on the title?
And.. what, precisely, do you think _you're_ doing in this comment? Is it not precisely what you complain about?
That's already done entirely server side. It could only be. If you mean predictive positioning from the client side you can do that with far less state than gets transmitted today, and you could factor in the other players momentum on the server side to see if prediction would even be necessary in a given frame or not.
The server could also send lots of phantom updates so the player client has no idea which objects are real and which aren't. The hacks could work around this but it would take a lot of power to do so. There's room for asymmetric counterhacks here.
As for the other types of bots those are far less useful and more detectable by naked eye without wallhacks, which ironically, is because lag compensation is server side, these hacks do not have a deterministic outcome when used.
When you look at a video of what a wallhack enables and how much state data gets transmitted that shouldn't be, I would be embarrassed to have such unworthy netcode in the 2020s. They've had 20 years and have done next to nothing.
frontier garbage.
Also if your guns aren't _perfectly_ accurate then the aimbot can't actually predict much of anything.
The secondary effect is that business will stop using processes and chemicals which require them to carry this warning. You've effectively created a new market segment.
Are the labels annoying to the point of comedy? Sure, but it's not /your/ behavior we were trying to modify.
It can. In several public cases it seems fairly clear that there is a "community" aspect to these productions and many of these sites highlight the number of downloads or views of an image. It creates an environment where creators are incentivized to go out of their way to produce "popular" material.
> Strict liability for possession in particular is nonsense.
I entirely disagree. Offenders tend to increase their level of offense. This is about preventing the problem from becoming worse and new victims being created. It's effectively the same reason we harshly prosecute people who torture animals.
> nor social damage involved in that at any point,
That's a bold claim. Is it based on any facts or study?
> over the extreme ickiness of the act as opposed to any actual harm caused by it.
It's about the potential class of victims and the outrageous life long damage that can be done to them. The appropriate response to recognizing these feelings isn't to hand them AI generated material to sate their desires. It's to get them into therapy immediately.
The gap between "high level assembly" and "compiled language" is about as large as it gets.
You have to establish that the CEO is actually aware of the reality and is interested in accurately conveying that to you. As far as I can tell there is absolutely no reason to believe any part of this.
Of obviously flawed corporate structures. This CEO has no particular programming expertise and most of his companies profits do not seem to flow from this activity. I strongly doubt he has a grip on the actual facts here and is uncritically repeating what was told to him in a meeting.
He should, given his position, been the very _first_ person to ask the questions you've posed here.
Here's half of it.
Other than considering current legally defined timezones as "legacy" definitions and then removing them for no reason other than to follow European fashion.
So, flexible, but managed by inflexible university types.
It is not documented, so no, it is not. Which is why I questioned if it was entirely based on self assessment or not and left the door open either way as the question was based out of curiosity and if his anecdote was public I wanted the answer to be as well. Is that not fair?
> when those pieces of data come together it provides evidence.
When you properly document them it literally stops being an anecdote and then becomes evidence.
> The researchers also tested semaglutide in rats that were made dependent on alcohol through long-term exposure to alcohol vapor.
So.. what are we actually measuring then? Isn't alcoholism a disease and not some acquired exposure based dependency? The idea that "GLP-1 for Everything" is even floated in this way is unusual in and of itself. I'm uncomfortable with all this and am once again annoyed at the way we use rats in research.
"The $3.57 you save on capacitors per unit will cost you $50 in lost good will."
On the other hand there is a balance between longevity through simplified maintenance and replacing aged appliances with newer and significantly more efficient models.
Deep space RTT is unavoidable.
They're either the same or they're different.
> Like I asked, where's our cutoff?
Exigency of loss of life.
> kills you a couple of decades earlier
Staying obese into old age carries risks. There are multiple ways to manage that risk. None of it is as exigent as other conditions.
> does treatment for that meet your approval?
Universally? No.
Oh. Thank you. That's very generous. I assumed we started from that position but apparently not.
> the market will deliver to the demand.
Yes, because our healthcare market is perfect, and we should acquiesce to it's demands. The same could be said of opioid pain killers.
> The cost benefit ratio is obvious
Which entities cost benefit ratio, exactly? The patients? Are you _sure_ you have data which allows you to say that?
> even accounting for potential side effects at scale.
You're free to your opinion. The market will repeat history.
That GLP-1 has benefits is good. That we could possibly rearrange our food system so we don't need it anymore is better.
You can acknowledge both without hurting _anyone_. You entirely lack an argument.
Our ancient environment was hostile as well.
> It patches malfunctioning reward centers
It has an impact on them. It does not "patch" them. This is not a rational way to describe any drug.
> it reduces overall inflammation
It can inhibit certain inflammatory pathways.
> it provide cardiovascular protective properties.
It reduces the number of cardiovascular events. Whether that number is normal to begin with is not considered here.
> We need more information and research.
You certainly do.
Is this based on your survey or her self assessment?
> Sitting in a bar for hours on end drinking heavily is simply downright uninteresting
Yet it used to be? You don't find this situation suspect?
Would you rather write your own parser?
I haven't seen any other tool with so much general utility and availability.
> to loop over a string array and print its contents
Is incredibly easy in bash and bash like shells. As highlighted the issue is that tools like 'ls' don't create "a string array." They create one giant string that has to be parsed. The rules in the shell are different than in other languages but it /will/ do most of the parsing for you, or all of it, if you do it carefully.
This is a fine tradeoff. As evidenced by it's wide usage and lack of convincing replacements.