anon4242

But FreeRTOS has been around for quite some time with wide support among HW manufacturers, so why not include that?

Interesting, I had to check their ToS and found this which seems a bit vague:

"[...]use the Services to store or transmit any inappropriate content, such as content that: (i) contains unlawful, defamatory, threatening, abusive, libelous or otherwise objectionable material of any kind or nature" [1]

(My emphasis)

[1] https://keybase.io/docs/acceptable-use-policy

I keep forgetting how hopelessly after on the insulation central Europe is compared to us in the north. A friend of a friend built a house by Swedish standards in the UK a while ago and all her neighbors pitied her because the snow remained on her roof during winter.

Sure, but as a result I've grown more and more cautious about relaxing my guard which has made me more and more quiet in social situations.

There are good energy efficient solutions to heating that use electricity. Here in Sweden the most common solution for new houses is the downhole heat exchanger [1]. If you want a cheaper initial investment an air heat pump can be used.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downhole_heat_exchanger

> Within a group, it might send the conversation off in a delightfully unanticipated direction.

Or a not so delightfully unanticipated direction. Too many times I've realized too late that I was in a "hostile" group, so I say something stupid thinking I'm among friends and it's like switching a button on the group mood.

> It's about being FUCKING SMART

It's not always about being FUCKING SMART, sometimes just having a different attitude helps.

I've worked with testers who refused to write code but would rather test everything manually (and fall behind on every sprint!), while stupid (yes), you could easily come in and be a 100X more productive by just writing tests as code.

For one company I worked for we had an old legacy system (running DOS) that we used to produce master copies of our disk images. When we needed a new master it would take the better part of a day to make all parts work. I wrote a program that could do what the legacy system did but under Windows, taking a couple of seconds to run and now we could get a master image as a build artifact. I don't consider myself FUCKING SMART, quite the opposite, especially at that company with those coworkers who were despite the sound of it actually really smart, but unlike my coworkers I had not accepted the situation but felt that there must be something to do to improve it.

TerraPower claims that their Traveling Wave Reactor could "sustain 80% of the world's population at U.S. per capita energy usages for over a millennium" by using the global stockpiles of depleted uranium [1]. The other upside would be that the new nuclear waste would be dangerously radioactive for a much shorter time.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling_wave_reactor

Turns out that that boring stuff - type theory - they throw at you in uni, can be quite useful. Not only can it help with things like memory safety but also with speed. This is why for instance C++ std::sort() is faster than C qsort(), better type information available to the compiler allows it to make better optimizations. In rust the type system is king.

Well, rereading what I wrote I was maybe not so clear on that.

If you are just waiting for the attraction to come back, chances are that it doesn't, even though it certainly could. It all depends on the reason that attraction disappears. Sometimes it's related to the things you do and sometimes it isn't. The key, I believe, is to always try to be a better spouse than you were a year ago, or even a month ago. But that of course presupposes that there exist mutual trust and respect between you. It won't work if only one part is trying to be a better self for the other.

The downside of that is that all code is in the header. As in you will compile all the library code whenever you include the header. As third-party library code is something you probably seldom change yourself, you don't want your build to spend time building it all the time.

Sure some of those libs may have some define you need to set in one of your .c files so the implementation will go there but then whenever you change that file it will result in a recompile of the third-party lib. So then you go and create a separate .c file just for the lib and we're back to why the lib author didn't do that in the first place?

No, I think what sqlite does is pretty neat. If you're doing development in the sqlite code-base you have lots of files (so you can manage it) but if you just want to use sqlite, you have the amalgamation which is one .c and one .h.

Nope, this is silly. Mutual attraction is what leads you to become couples in the first place. The physical part of attraction is what leads you to notice the other person and then building an emotional bond with each other will increase the attraction. So attraction is a symptom not a cause. Like any emotion attraction comes and goes. IMHO believing this folly is what leads to so many people breaking up when they could be very happy together and why so many people are lonely these days.

My own experience after 15 years of marriage is that attraction comes and goes for both me and my wife. But by not doing anything rash when that happens we have both discovered that it also comes back. Sure the first few times it happened it was quite scary, but then we've found a rhythm with the ebbs and floods.

Oh :O, up here in the north (Sweden) you have to look pretty hard to find a plan without unlimited everything but data.

> I'd be happy to MMS my uncle if it didn't cost like two euros per 640x480 picture

Wow, where are you living? I haven't paid to send an MMS in nearly ten years...

A few years later they were passing out free copies of OS/2 CDs as if there was no tomorrow (which, by then there really wasn't...)

> IBM rules about confidentiality meant that some Microsoft employees were unable to talk to other Microsoft employees without a legal translator between them.

Haha, this is so ironic. I've worked on projects for MS that were just the same. We had to have code names for their code names and a code name for MS itself. Even our own code names had to be uttered with caution. Maybe they learned from IBM? Edit: Thinking about it some more, maybe they really did. None of the other big tech companies we did work for were that secretive.

Yes, and that is what I said in my very first post in this thread. Still you need to handle the counters in SW, do the XORs in SW (unless you have some HW that does that for you as well) and then if you want CCM you need to solve CBCMAC (maybe you have CBC in HW but then there's the memory trade-off again). If you want GCM you need to do BigInt muls (Cortex-M MCUs do not support 128 bit muls). So either way you end up doing pretty substantial parts of it in SW which limits the usability.

Yes, my main experience is with 2) and these are pretty "modern" (as in recently released MCUs) that support AES-ECB (and maybe a few more in HW). These are not ARMv8 but Cortex-M level MCUs.

The problem and the point I'm trying to make is that a few platforms implement their ECB support in such a way to make it almost useless as a building block. They do not do it as processor instructions the way it's done in x86 (the right way IMHO) but instead it's implemented in a separate co-processor that you program in a similar manner as you setup a typical DMA-transfer. If you aim to encrypt 1KB or more the setup cost for this is negligible and you can get a comparatively good speed. However as we both agree there are very few cases (if any) where you _actually_ want to run ECB over 1KB blocks at a time. When you want to build something like CTR (or CBC), what you need is a fast way to ECB _a single_ AES block (i.e. 16 bytes). With this kind of solution the setting up of the co-processor eats up almost any gains won by doing ECB in HW compared to doing ECB in SW because the cost of the setup (it's I/O after all) comes close to the cost of a SW only ECB of 16 bytes.

> Setup cost is a thing, but A) is largely paid when you rekey

Well, it depends on the crypto HW. Some HWs are designed for "throughput", which is completely useless for ECB but looks good on specs ("Our HW AES 10MB/s!"). So you set it up with src, dest and key pretty much as you setup your typical DMA transfer, only you almost never want to encrypt more than 16 bytes at a time with ECB so it's mostly wasted.

> consumer device SoC (eg, all Qualcomm, Samsung, Apple, AMD, and Intel parts)

We are not all so fortunate that we get to work with such powerful SoC. In my job it's mostly small embedded MPUs.

> B) is acceptable in many protocols

I think we are talking past each other here. I haven't even gotten to the protocol part yet. In order to support a wireless and/or network protocol you will need better building blocks than AES-ECB. You need AES-GCM (or at least AES-CCM). Not to mention ECDSA or RSA(>=3072)...

> Nearly every SoC you can buy today has hardware accelerators in it

True, but few are full-featured HW acceleration SoCs. Most support a few operations like for instance AES-ECB and maybe AES-CBC but if you want AES-CCM or AES-GCM you still need to implement parts of it in software. The HW may be super fast at ECB:ing many blocks of memory but the setup cost is steep so when you need to ECB just a single block (for your counter in CCM) it buys you very little performance gains over just ECB in SW. (Of course what you do then is setting up several counters in a larger block of memory, after each other, this is ok because the counters are just increments, and you ECB a bunch of blocks. Next you need to solve how to do the same to get CBCMAC with just CBC HW...)

If there Germans managed to support themselves on 100% renewable energy I wouldn't say they needed to go nuclear again. As it is the Germans rely on more than 50% dirty energy which is polluting all of northern Europe and people ARE dying because of it.

So, sure there are dangers with nuclear power if there's an accident. Ideally there shouldn't be, historically there has been a few (seven with fatal outcomes to be exact)[1]. Still with modern reactors that shutdown instead of melting down we should be able to safely handle virtually any accident. With burning fossil fuels the deaths are not _if_ there's an accident, they are a _consequence_ of polluting the air. And the 800000 annual deaths caused by coal burning doesn't even include deaths due to global warming [2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accident... [2] https://endcoal.org/health/

The acid rains we get here in northern Europe thanks to the Germans insistency with burning coal sure doesn't improve the habitability of the country either. I much rather take a minuscule risk of making my country uninhabitable than the certainty of doing so (even if done slowly over time).

In the 30+ years since Chernobyl we could have had >400000 similar accidents and still not reach the death toll of coal burning... that's food for thought...

So because you (Germans) have an irrational fear of a black swan event (there has been seven nuclear accidents with fatal outcome in the 60 years we have been nuclear [1] with a very low death toll), you instead are participating in killing off nearly 1 million ppl per year by burning coal [2]. Heck, even if you went all wind & solar the annual death toll would be higher per TWh [3].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accident... [2] https://endcoal.org/health/ [3] https://www.energycentral.com/c/ec/deaths-nuclear-energy-com...

I also got my Kindle around then and have never felt the need to upgrade. It works like a charm and I can read for weeks without recharging. I have hundreds of books on it and have never needed to remove any for lack of space.

The only thing that tempts me to upgrade is the new water-proof version so I finally can comfortably read while in the bath...

And then when Leftpad-Azer removes his packages the next time the image won't load at all...

How would you know it's a gravestone? What if what you consider a gravestone is a perfectly legit byte sequence for a certain program?

LOL! Making the Internet readable again!

But the carbon isn't released into the atmosphere when trees rot. Dead trees turn into soil. Most of a dead tree's carbon will be bound to the ground as soil.

At a quick glance at least it seems that what Z offers is a better (in the eyes of its designer) syntax. I glanced through to about the ternary operator in order to find the USP. After going back just now I found "The Why of Z" and it seems to be that text output typically needs some kind of module import:

    "First off, the import statement is clutter. Why can't the text function be built-in, perhaps?"

So it seems it's not out to solve the bigger issues of programming...