defaultname

C arrays are nothing more than convenient pointer math. array[1024] = &array + sizeof(element) * index (in that case 1024). And while there is some weird post-facto "one past the end" bit in the standard (added long after Quake 3 was made), in any modern compiler you can happily get pointers for illegal indexes. If you have a literally sized array and a literal offset it could warn (e.g. Warray-bounds), but for the vast majority of cases it won't flag at all. Nor would this cause any runtime issues. Because it's just math.

And the truth is that without runtime memory protection you can dereference those illegal positions.

This is a complex task, fraught on any platform. Most systems base such clustering on a shared filesystem, which is obviously orthogonal to the shared nothing designs most try to pursue.

I mentioned El Salvador's murder rate because it is a very broken country. Literally the worst in the world. What El Salvador does isn't convincing. I'm not the one who brought up El Salvador as a model to justify something.

As to the "clear bias", I literally laughed out loud at that hilarious claim. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about this entire discussion.

Firstly, I don't work in that realm anymore, but secondly it's _irrelevant_ because the product that I worked on could as easily be "backed" by BTC (in fact it is used in multiple jurisdictions backed by various currencies. The net is that something of value can be transmitted between users). None of these payment systems -- including "Bitcoin Beach" -- actually operate off of the BTC blockchain (you know, because it's completely broken trash).

My bias against Bitcoin is that it is a garbage solution that solves literally nothing -- it is one of the worst solutions in every single claimed use -- but that we have to constantly hear a million pathetic salespeople for it because they've "invested" in it. If there were a thousand pet rock HN commentators pitching pet rocks in every discussion I'd shit on that too.

The whole of Amazon has been tarred with working conditions for their warehouse and drivers. I assume the information workers don't have to piss in bottles and go through metal detectors.

However we just recently heard about Amazon hiring to fire, with an internal policy and broken pursuit-of-metrics that yields fundamental dysfunction.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27111566

Again, what "conclusion" do you think I'm jumping to? Modernizing payment systems is having a huge impact across the entire developing world. I spent two years of my life building a system for payments (mobile to mobile) for a variety of African countries. Negligible fees, immediate, robust and reliable. This isn't new or novel.

Bitcoin has shockingly little to do with El Salvador. It is a lightning network being pitched (which could be funded by USD, gold, eggs, turtles...whatever), trying to pump BTC in the process.

So save with the feel good El Salvador story.

It has nothing to do with lack of empathy, nor did I make any statement about banking in El Salvador. Your pearl clutching is the rather pathetic, desperate machinations of someone deep in BTC who is resorting to whatever foolish argument they can make to sell it. The vapid moralizing is embarrassing.

You used El Salvador to try to legitimize BTC. As a tiny economic "power" (literally 7-11 sized), with a functionally broken government, it counts for somewhere approximating zero in legitimizing the farce that is BTC. The only people who think it is notable are BTC hypesters.

Adorable pearl clutching.

There is nothing conspiratorial or notable that most of the people in the financial industry...work in the financial industry. Are experienced in the financial industry.

And even if they did, it's El Salvador. It's a tiny economy (Cleveland has a GDP 4X the entirety of El Salvador) in effectively a broken country. In 2015, 1 out of 1000 people was murdered in a single year.

Pretty weird seeing the BTC crew all crowing about that kind of sad endorsement of a desperate government.

Though the plot of the 1982 film was pretty clear that the Norwegians dug up an alien space craft, and a smaller "human sized" dig that was presumed to be its occupant.

Yeah, I saw the "Safari is the new Internet Explorer" argument. I, like many others, found it uproariously stupid. It betrays an authorship and readership that have literally no clue what the IE era was like. Just some sort of "IE bad" cudgel bit of pandering rhetoric.

It is whispering to a very specific audience.

And through all of this, the most remarkable thing is that Safari is hugely over represented among web visitors, both from iOS and Macs. It's almost like providing an extremely fast, light, energy efficient, feature rich browser encourages its use.

This is another thread where anything contrary the mob is going to hit -4, but here I am because such things are a bit fun.

I replied to someone specifically claiming that Apple made an exception for the all powerful Netflix, but that Hey was too small to get the same exception -- it's just big v small. In actuality Apple has a "gerrymandered" broad set of categories that are exempt (whether you are a garage company or a multinational), otherwise you have to provide basic functionality in your app without such a subscription. Hey didn't fit in the categories, and they didn't provide the functionality.

I may disagree with Apple on this -- and there should be an App label denoting that external subscriptions are necessary -- however phrasing and truth actually matters.

There are a core group of extremely passionate anti-Apple folks who seem to go through every Apple thread and downvote anything that doesn't have torch in hand. It's pretty silly, but whatever.

I just saw one of these guys sincerely claim that Safari was "notoriously outdated and incompatible with the modern web". It is beyond parody.

There was a thread the other day that seriously argued that Apple promised the App Store was "completely secure" (which apparently extends out to guaranteeing the honesty, security and operational practices of every business if they happen to have an app on the App Store). I took multiple -4 downvote sprees for pointing out actual fact and reality, and felt good that I at least wasted a bit of their time.

It's boring and below HN, but it's the reality we live with.

Yes, of course it is. And it's self-serving. Apple saw that they needed to have these cross-platform services -- from big and small and medium sized creators and businesses -- and they carved out exemptions.

"notoriously outdated and incompatible with the modern web."

There are a lot of anti-Apple arguments a passionate critic might leverage, but claiming that Safari is "notoriously outdated and incompatible with the modern web" is just foolish. It is laughable nonsense.

Apple has always had clear exceptions for video, audio, magazine and newspaper apps.

"3.1.3(a) “Reader” Apps: Apps may allow a user to access previously purchased content or content subscriptions (specifically: magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, and video). Reader apps may offer account creation for free tiers, and account management functionality for existing customers."

It isn't because Netflix or Amazon are "powerful" enough, but that they saw that these were traditional multiplatform services.

I disagree with the ridiculous Hey situation (and note that Apple backed down), however let's be accurate.

It was originally denied by political decree.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/06/obama-re...

It was political from end to end, and was never denied on fundamental grounds, but instead has been governed by protectionism. What made it particularly farcical is that at the same time Obama was pontificating about the horror's of Alberta's oil and turning an environmental new leaf, US shale oil exploration (just as bad in every dimension) was growing at a staggering pace, and is now multiples the output of Alberta's oils ands.

The quicker we transition to renewables the better, but the farce of Keystone was always just politics.

Immediately setup my iPadOS 15 iPad beside my macOS 12 M1 machine....and it didn't work. At the time there were a couple of brief articles saying just move the mouse off the edge of your screen.

They haven't released this technology yet, so we can't test it out. Just an FYI to anyone who looks to try it out.

As an aside, I have a Mac Mini beside a MBP in my normal setup. My BT keyboard and mouse are connected to the mini. I wish I could do this as easily to jump between machines.

Oh, are we? Seems like we're kind of all over the map in here. Whatever particular teased angle apparently wins the argument or something.

All while Apple keeps executing superbly. Eh.

"My M1 Mac's GPU still loses in several benchmarks against my 7-year-old 1060."

The GPU in the AS M1 is the fastest integrated graphics available in the mainstream computing market [1]. That is the competition, not a standalone, 120W GPU. Apple is purportedly now working on separating their GPU designs into a much larger heat and power profile (which contrary to some of the comments on here clearly isn't going to be for laptops, beyond an external TB4 enclosure) and it might just change things a bit.

Scaling a GPU is easier than scaling a CPU, by design. Apple's GPU has nothing to do with ARM.

And to your original point, yes, Apple does largely choose which workloads run on Apple Silicon and how. By controlling the APIs along with the silicon, Apple abstracts it to a degree that gives them enormous flexibility. The Accelerate and CoreML APIs are abstract vehicles that might use one or a thousand matrix engines, neural nets, or an array of GPUs. Apple has built a world where they have more hardware flexibility than anyone. And while close to no one is doing model training on Apple hardware right now, Apple has laid the foundation so a competitive piece of hardware could change that overnight.

[1] The SoC graphics of the chips in the PS5 and Xbox Series X have more powerful graphics, but the GPU chiplet alone on those systems uses a magnitude more power and more die than the entire M1 SoC. In another comment you mentioned that Zen 2 integrated graphics come close. They aren't within a ballfield, literally with 1/4 or worse the performance. In discussions like this unfortunately the boring "n years old / n process" trope is used to excess, yet again there are zero competitive integrated graphics on the market. None. Apple isn't a GPU company, yet here we are.

If Apple could just scale up their GPU and trounce a 430B market cap competitor's premiere product at 1/2 the power, 60% of the die size, that actually looks pretty bad for nvidia, doesn't it? Scaling is more difficult than that, and who knows if they could so easily, but who thought Apple would render both Intel and nvidia irrelevant?

Regardless, Apple's threat to vendors like that is their complete vertical integration. Ran some of the new object capture code (photogrammetry) on my M1 Mac yesterday and in no time at all the 11 trillion op neural engine blasted through and generated a remarkable model. We've seen Apple respond to discovered performance needs by plugging in a matrix engine, a neural engine, and scaling appropriately, dedicating cores and silicon to the greatest needs. They are in a very unique position relative to someone like nvidia who effectively throws something over a fence.

A large number of Apple devices in the field, and even still for sale by Apple, have AMD GPUs. It's most likely legacy support driving its inclusion -- if Apple abstracted the pluggable device, appropriately branching it for their existing AMD and new chips seems a given.

It's extremely doubtful any new Apple Silicon device will come out with AMD GPUs.

What?

Not only is microdosing a thing, shrooms can be used recreationally with none of the cliche shroom effects.

I have a very adverse effect to alcohol, so if I'm seeking a mild buzz or want to enjoy social events more -- or just want a mental vacation -- a <2g dose (dried cubensis -- this is way beyond microdosing, but just on the topic of "not all shroom experiences are space walks") yields just a nice feeling and experience that lasts for many hours. I'm more in the moment, relaxed, and seem to enjoy experiences more, without hallucinations or altered judgment.

Obviously I need to disclaim that this is my experience. Other people might become murderous psychotics or something. I don't encourage anyone else to do anything based on this. However there is a pretty common advocacy of microdosing.

Though this submission is utterly absurd if it's seriously positing that the public at large is microdosing rather than taking walks.

I do have Keep Originals enabled. Forgot all about that setting, but I do believe it tries to be overly clever in Automatic mode (mostly assuming connected devices can't handle HEIC, etc).

Before I wrote my original post, I verified my assumption by connecting my 12P (14.6) to my Windows 10 box (on which zero Apple software runs -- iTunes has never existed on that device). Immediately got the share confirmation and then a DCIM folder.

That folder has the source files in it. HEIC images. MP4 videos (videos, though they are limited to 4GB because of the FAT32 simulation the iPhone is doing). And the other file type for the live photos (I can't recall the extension). No conversions occur, I can copy them directly, etc.

I must be misunderstanding something, however if you plug an iPhone into a Windows PC, the iPhone will ask if you'd like to share photos and videos with the connected device. Say yes and you get a completely typical DCIM share.

I guess. Though I've never seen HN so invested in someone getting a $1.65 refund. Maybe we can setup a GoFundMe or something.

As to the BBB, personally I find it to be a worse-than-useless corrupt joke. But running to them, forcing Apple to respond, is the kind of thing that just doesn't have a lot of pull against large companies.

Astonishing. And there it is.

The actual story states that something unique in the customer's storage was causing an error on Apple's side, yielding downtime.

I'm not remotely blaming the customer, but what a nothing-burger this submission is: Apple didn't "shut down" his iCloud account, they met an edge in their implementation that they had to remediate. Obviously customer support should be better and convey more information, but I picture a bunch of engineers frantically trying to deal with something they didn't plan for (cue replies claiming that the perfect programmers of HN would never have such an edge, how is it possible, etc) and things getting lost in translation.

I do find the story interesting in that he immediately filed a complaint with the BBB. That seems...risky. It's unfortunate that big corps can do this, but I wouldn't want to be perceived as a "problem" customer doing things like that when big Corps control your online existence.

We are discussing the claim that Apple guarantees every app is "completely secure". Thanks for the comment though.