cix_pkez

As mentioned in other comments, "them" works fine. It has been such a convention for hundreds of years.

And I find it ironic that in this discussion of choosing words carefully, we still use the basically meaningless (because of all of the different ways to use them) words "conservative" and "liberal". The words have nonpolitical meanings, and political meanings. And even the political meanings are inconsistent.

Love Rust, but there's room for garbage collection over borrowchecking if we're talking about replacing scripting languages. It would be hard for a decent statically-typed FP language to be slower than Ruby, for example.

I mean, you could definitely convince me that it's not an aside worth including in the article for the sake of staying on point.

I'll still take Ars at its worst over most general news sites' tech reporting at its best.

While I found your comment funny, I could stand to be a bit more charitable. I think it's an interesting side point they're trying to make about analog computation, but to be accurate should maybe be written more like "A theoretical perfectly-machined set of gears could perform calculations to infinite precision."

Everywhere I've lived with this "service", there's been no respect for potted plants either. They get the full violence of the wind.

There was even a group of these guys who came straight up to my door, open except for the screen, and blew right into the house. They arrived early and started blowing in that very spot, which is why I hadn't had time to close the door. Just jerks.

I agree it's better to let them decay in lots of cases.

Also, I try to give the benefit of the doubt to the people outside doing this every week, but I'm extremely annoyed. I don't really have a choice; I rent and everywhere one can rent, one has to be a part of this madness. I wouldn't by choice pay someone to do this.

Hey, non-mathematician computer science type here.

If I follow correctly, the issue with randomly picking any real number in that interval is that irrational numbers would require infinite computational steps to resolve. So the probability is really 0 that you'll get an irrational. If you have a finite number of computations, you're guaranteed to resolve to a rational, while if you have an infinite number of computations, you never resolve to anything.

Is that a decent lay interpretation?

Thanks for serving and glad to know someone with your passionate commitment to knowledge is helping advance medicine.

Having multiple versions of dependency libraries was a pain on DOS, Windows, ... It just is what it is. For the record, you can have multiple versions on any OS, but it's important they have a version in their name and that the dependent application is aware of that convention.

The specifics of path layout is just how Unix-like systems do things in general. It's not all that different on MacOS.

If you really like the filesystem layout of Windows, just use Windows. If you really like `exe` files, just use Windows. I don't see the problem.

I haven't had the same experience. Which distros have you tried? Perhaps another would be a better fit technically or community-wise. I'd recommend Manjaro for a rolling release (no major reinstall every year), a focus on user-friendliness, a friendly community, as well as being based on Arch, which means the platinum-standard Arch Wiki is available as documentation for you.

I've really not had any issues finding what I need for Arch Linux.

If you want to install to a different disk, you could still install the raw binary, or mount a directory in your applications directory.

Those are just hard situations in general. I'm a big advocate of statically linking anything possible, because I have disk space galore and dependencies can be a pain as for your last point.

Yeah, I agree.

I've really taken the time to look at the pros and cons of each, but even a bundled list like that would likely not be useful to anyone else.

But at least I can fix the flaws I see on Linux (often).

Ah, yes, but my package manager covers every piece of software I use. No specialized update services. It seems like a small thing, but it's more pleasant.

Exactly. I've used all 3 major OSs and when we get into these discussions, you have to look at how each has its own pain points to be fair. Overall, Linux is a clear win for me. But YMMV, indeed.

I switched from Windows to Linux before I had a smartphone and appreciate the package manager. I got a Macbook for work and lamented the lack of package manager (homebrew is a weak substitute in several ways).

I'd call that a good thing, really. Not needing ever more dependencies.

I think this is a solid direction to go.

Let's just say I give the React devs... props.

Some do. But in those cases, you might be better served with Ryzen.

If you're playing games, you'll get better performance with this i9.

But if you're playing games, you're probably not CPU-bound anyway.

I'd be interested in what niches people here work in and what CPUs they look for because of their unique needs.

I leave it to future readers to decide who's missing the point between the two of us.

This is disingenuous. Quoting the abstract: ``` Language design does have a significant, but modest effect on software quality. Most notably, it does appear that disallowing type confusion is modestly better than allowing it, and among functional languages, static typing is also somewhat better than dynamic typing. We also find that functional languages are somewhat better than procedural languages. ```

The "statically typed" languages that you're focusing on (I say probably because they're the ones with high bug counts in the data) are probably C and C++, which have other issues making them higher in bug count. C is hardly even typed. Both have manual memory management.

Also, there's no control for commit frequency. Some people put everything in one commit, while others commit every line change. The Rails Tutorial even recommends the latter.

Lastly, Scala and Haskell killed in this study, as far as raw numbers go. But it doesn't seem significant.

I'll stick with subjective evaluations for now. This is just too hard to measure.

In spite of all the statistics that suggest I'm doing pretty well toward retirement compared to most of my generation, I feel quite a bit of anxiety about how much I'm saving.

I'm not confident that I'll receive social security. Huge health expenses may come up.

How do others feel? You're not all billionaire unicorns on this site, are you?

Designing patterns on shirts is high-skilled work?

Some amount of military is good. I will not deny ours is quite large. Perhaps having the largest is also a good. But so much larger than everyone else's? I don't know. But that's not really the tradeoff I meant.

In the space of just social programs, or societal improvement programs, I'd love to see more national parks, environmental cleanup, scientific research funding, etc. There are people who are willing but unable to do work in these areas. The US provides a pretty good amount of money in these areas, even as I desire more.

tl;dr if you're a US citizen, vote for people who'll spend how you want them to spend. If you're not, oh well, it's not your decision

More affordable education would be nice. Certainly not free for everyone, like Bernie proposed. Not everyone needs college and there are definitely some degrees that the state shouldn't pay for.

The arts are valuable and I'd love to have a country which could patronize the arts and artists. But we don't have that kind of money. Even if we did, there are other priorities for things we should be paying people to do.

In any case, the one argument for UBI I found somewhat convincing was that it could be cheaper than social security, unemployment, etc all combined, because there'd be less administrative cost.

I appreciate that some governments were willing to experiment.

Change can be good, but tests ought to be tried before large , even well-intentioned changes to massive systems.

I actually agree totally, but perhaps not for your intended reason.

I have a hunch that the clear syntax and relative simplicity of web programming is what drives a certain kind of developer to long for complexity and turn something simple into this: `user.public? && (current_user.try(:test) ? user.test? : !user.test?)`

The programming I love and web development are very different things.

Sadly, the latter is the most prevalent.

2.

Governmental incompetence is all a great charade meant to make their flawlessly-executed deceptions and conspiracies more believable.

Why is it so easy to spoof a phone number and robocall people, yet not to spoof an IP? Everyone's talking about the machine attribution as a given.