compiler-guy

This puzzled me and I looked it up, and yes, sinks without overflow meet code [1] (but not tubs). So your situation was apparently legal.

But the sibling comment to this one, where a sink had an overflow, but it was not connected, did not meet code [also 1].

Go figure. There must be some reasoning there, but I'm confused as to what it is.

https://forms.iapmo.org/email_marketing/codespotlight/2018/m...

I once saw Casablanca with a friend who hadn’t seen it, and she said, “Wow. This movie jam packed with cliches. It’s off putting. Wait. This is the source of all the cliches isn’t it?”

Which it is. One of the most quotable movies of all time. If memes were a thing in 1942, it would have been the king. Still quotable today.

In the US, any tub made past about 1900 or so has an overflow drain that prevents overfilling. The adoption of such drains not quite contemporaneous with the adoption of indoor plumbing, but very soon after.

It's the metal plate usually just below the faucet that looks like it might be useless. But it has an opening underneath to let the overflow water in. These are always sized to handle more water than the faucet can output.

This is basically a non-concern in anything but very, very old, unremodeled bathrooms.

The sinks do as well, but it is more obvious.

There is also the issue that the next person stepping into their shoes to clean up the mess is being recruited exactly during this time. And if your company gets a reputation for not paying out prenegotiated severances or nitpicking over them, it makes the next candidate that much more wary.

Tim Cook:

[Jobs’] advice to me was ‘Never ask what I would do, just do the right thing,’

He had watched Disney go through this paralysis of sitting around and talking about what Walt [Disney] would do. And he did not want that for Apple.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLqUXIwPGUo

There is a lot of software support needed to make this work great. So first generation of all that for sure.

Things could be a lot better than they are now, but “maximally evil”? Come on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws

The reason the enum is so nice is that it works as a terrific language-supplied abstraction that covers up those bit manipulations. It's very nice to get those abstractions for free like you do in Rust, but it can't be optimal for every specialized use case.

This new code also supplies similar abstractions. That actual specific code is much harder to reason about, but most users--and even the next person who works on the interpreter--simply won't care, or even know what is going on underneath the hood. The abstractions provided by the author do that work and apparently do it cleanly.

For most use-cases, that extra hand-written code isn't worth it. But in specific cases it can be, and the author has actually measured the value and determined that it is.

One of many errors. Another is saying that all memories support writing data. Apparently this author has never heard of ROM. Or CD and DVD drives. Or neglected to carefully read the ai assisted parts.

Sports betting has externalities that are hard to push back into the original bettor and the bookie. Solving those externalities involves regulation in some form, whether by regulation or heavy taxes.

The data speak very strongly against this conclusion. The data is deep and broad that marriage leads to better outcomes, and is a result of marriage itself, not selection for people who tend to get married, although that also helps. Also, this doesn't mean that every marriage results in better outcomes for every couple, just that it tends to do so.

One study that summarizes previous studies is below, but there are literally hundreds of others.

The Effects of Marriage on Health: A Synthesis of Recent Research Evidence. Research Brief (https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/effects-marriage-health-synthes... Note: an official US government web site.)

"Married people are generally healthier than unmarried people, as measured by numerous health outcomes.(1) To investigate the complex relationship between marriage and health, this review scrutinizes recent research, focusing on studies that use rigorous statistical methods to examine whether marriage is a cause of these better health outcomes."

I have had two different dentists recommend water flossers in the past. Got one as a gift several years ago and am pretty happy.

I believe that sometimes there are bad outcomes from standard medical advice—humans are messy and the world is complicated—but I would like to know much more about the failing case before making a judgement.

Plus everything important is always written down.

It’s more true in aviation than anywhere else (except maybe space flight), but still.

It doesn't even have to be a pile of shit; it could be something that was interesting by itself, but that doesn't mean I want a deep dive.

This happened to me with youtube and feral hog trapping. A two-minute video of that showed up in my feed, and yeah, it was interesting to see how and why it was done. But my feed was full of that for a long time, and even now, years later, one will pop up just desperately trying to get me to re-engage.

It was interesting as a one off, not as a way of life.

emacs did this too.

Clang and GCC do provide these, and automatically use them in many situations (particularly small copies). But c-libraries can actually do it better in many cases, especially for large copies.

Glibc, for example, has perhaps ten different implementations of memcpy just for x86. The compiler certainly could provide all that, but the next step is harder:

glibc automatically dispatches to the proper one at runtime based on the actual microarchitecture that the binary is running on. You pay the extra dispatch cost once, but all of non-inline function call cost every time. This is what allows distros to compile to a nice baseline architecture, but still get near-optimal memcpy performance on many more architectures than a single inline instance could possibly give. These differences matter.

And it does it for not just memcpy, but half-a-dozen other extremely performance sensitive library functions, like strcpy and so on.

Inlining works very much against this strategy. If you can guarantee that the target microarch never changes, then it isn't a good one. But that is somewhat unusual for everyone but those who build their own binaries to run on a single class of machines forever.

Worse, inlining the really high performance versions of these ends up being terrible from a code size perspective, because they are often hundreds of instructions, which can have bad caching effects. And once you amortize the function-call cost over many iterations of the loop, it isn't so expensive to call out to the library.

Anyway, just some additional considerations to think about.

"The underlying product, the model keeps improving and therefore increases its value."

That's not exactly true. Yes, the fundamental capabilities of the models do seem to be growing dramatically, but the economic value of any particular model may be steady, or even falling, because of commoditization, or other issues external to the model itself.

Without a moat, improvement in model capability does not necessarily translate into economic value--and the labs need economic value to pay their obligations.

They were acquired by AWS, not Google. But the point still stands.

I greatly appreciate this attention to detail, and there isn't enough of this in the world. For example, in Visual Studio popups on hover happen so fast you can barely select anything, or you end up clicking on the popup instead of selecting a word.

Yep. To overcome an incumbent that sells a very good product and has momentum, it is almost never enough to be somewhat better. You have to be "knock my socks off" better.

The Zune may have been somewhat better (until the nano and iphone), but it wasn't enough better to overcome the ecosystem switching costs.

Pareidolia is part of the human condition. It's unfortunate that people take the results of that very natural tendency with a grain of salt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

Pareidolia (/ˌpærəˈdoʊliə/)[1] is the tendency for perception to impose a meaningful interpretation on a nebulous stimulus, usually visual, so that one detects an object, pattern, or meaning where there is none.

No. As long as the sharing permission is “Anyone with the link”, then anyone can download from that link with wget or whatever.

Is that the permission they use? Who knows? But it’s at least possible.

"Code is bytes of text on disk"....

...organized in a very specific fashion with a great deal of creativity and attention to that specific organization.

I can't copyright the alphabet, but I can copyright certain arrangements of it, subject to a variety of rules.

Heh. It's pilot error all the way up at the beginning. GCC releases did ship these files, and they did it by using maintainer mode, which was generally a pain for those not maintainers. Which also explains why I was confused about the build. I definitely built it with the source on read-only file systems back in the day.

https://www.gnu-pascal.de/standards.html (from 2000.)

"Naturally, all the source files must be in the distribution. It is okay to include non-source files in the distribution, provided they are up-to-date and machine-independent, so that building the distribution normally will never modify them. We commonly include non-source files produced by Bison, lex, TeX, and makeinfo; this helps avoid unnecessary dependencies between our distributions, so that users can install whichever packages they want to install."

The output is stored in the build directory, not the source directory. So now you have to either detect that lex and yacc aren’t available and do something clever or let the user do it. And then wonder why their modifications don’t stick.

You also have to ensure that every time you update the .y file, you update another file in the source tree, when it’s really part of the build.

It’s annoying and would be similar to the maintainer mode builds that used to happen and confuse people.

It can be done, but the benefits are low. Most systems back in the day had lex and yacc available. Systems that didn’t, but also that needed a compiler were rare, and the vast majority of the time you just cross compiled in those situations.

GCC at the time was under GPL v2, which includes.

"The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it."

For lex and yacc, that means the original .y and .l files. You don't have a choice if you want to be compliant with the terms. Also, shipping the .h and .c files in addition also ends up confusing the build systems of the time.

There are numerous systems available for this type of system that are professionally designed and built, and satisfy all kinds of local codes.

Many are in use all over the world in off-grid cabins and similar.

You do need to take care that they are installed correctly, and maintained properly, but that isn't much different than a natural gas connection, or even normal everyday electricity.

Plugging a power-supply into a normal outlet like this is legal in many places, and illegal in many others.

Check local code before proceeding!

Explain your reasoning at least.

The government has to maintain some infrastructure to get this sort of thing done. Whether digital or analog. And if it contracts it out, it needs to oversee it. So no matter how it is done, the government has to pay.

For the first level customers, sure. But their customers’ customers? Almost certainly not.

There is no way for Iron Mountain to determine who OSS’s customers are, and their permissions, without help from OSS itself.

And because OSS is defunct, they can’t get that help.