deschutes

And yet this was newsworthy for the unusual number of deaths. That's pretty telling.

To your broader point, yes just ignore the problem and everything will go away. That has worked so well.

The folks calling for an unconditional surrender of Hamas are not wrong. That's the only way to end this bloodshed, that, yes, includes civilians on both sides. Only one side is doing it with the primary intent to kill civilians though.

The explanation is not convincing.

My guess is some kind of measurement error or one of the "load bearing nop" phenomena. By that I mean the alignment of instructions (esp branch targets?) can dramatically affect performance and compilers apparently have rather simplistic models for this or don't consider it at all.

Per https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37001387 it's not just mass but elevation. The eruption was significant in the upper atmosphere.

One wonders if European lawmakers have any idea what a business is.

The promise of AGI isn't really optimizing something mundane like widget manufacturing though surely it will be tasked with doing that. It's a rapid advancement of the frontier of knowledge. For example we dream of curing disease and aging but it is beyond our current knowledge.

Obviously nobody knows what that looks like or when or if we'll get there but there is probably a ton of existential hazards if we do. Shit even finding out things we hope for are truly impossible would be a kind of doom of its own.

The effectiveness of persuasion depends on the appeal of the idea. AGI is going to have the credibility to make very appealing claims.

For an evil example, I imagine it would be easy to convince animals to eat poisoned food.

Do sub interpreters actually work with c extensions? I get the extension API has long supported it. However, I wonder if in practice extensions rely on process global state to stash information.

If so, sub interpreters invite all kinds of nasty bugs. Keep in mind that porting the most popular extensions is an easy exercise so the more interesting question is how this hidden majority of extensions fares.

Doors are part of the structure of the vehicle and must stay closed to do their job in a collision. To my understanding this is the primary if not sole reason doors lock after a few seconds in motion.

You can't eliminate the risk of data loss, only control for it. fsync is one such control. Empirically, having separate power failure domains strongly controls for the power loss risk.

In the tail there are all kinds of things that will lose you data. I've actually seen systems lose data with the fsync every message strategy on simultaneous power loss. There was latent corruption of the filesystem due to a kernel bug. After power cycling a majority of nodes had unrecoverable filesystems.

In my experience, even on modern flash the cost of fsync is non trivial. It pessimizes io. You can try to account for this with group commit / batching but but generally the batch window needs to be large relative to network rtt to be effective.

fsync is much more necessary on single primary systems.

Who knows. It's completely uncharted territory. It's not hard to imagine how malevolent AGI could end us.

The illusion of control over something that may well have incomprehensible intelligence is a joke. Tell me, what control does the farm animal have over its own fate?

It's a common thought but from what I can tell it's probably not true. Natural gas is simply the cheapest and most scaled way of producing ammonia (which is the critical ingredient in fertilizer production). Apparently electrolysis could come within a factor of 2 in terms of price.

Also worth considering that passenger aviation is on the same order of magnitude in terms of CO2 emissions. Remarkable given everyone has to eat.

https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector

I was thinking of upwards price pressure on housing stock in those communities as the main negative effect. Rationale being that tech salaries are going to be significantly above incomes the local economy supports and thus tech workers are going to be relatively price insensitive.

That said, remote work is hardly the only thing contributing to this problem. And I agree with the idea that changing housing policy is the best way to address it.

I don't dispute that there will be positive effects as well. They seem less significant to me.

Many made expensive decisions assuming remote work would become the norm. My guess is there is a large overlap between the bristling crowd and expensive decisions crowd.

Sure remote work is good for many experienced individual tech workers but bad for basically everyone else including the company and the communities remote workers have moved to.

The pro remote arguments reek of motivated reasoning. It is especially hard to escape noticing that remote work is financially beneficial for tech workers. Particularly as it relates to housing.

Fun stuff. Why aren't unfinished tasks gc roots?

The struct tag is an idea that's survived into approximately zero other languages. It's largely visual clutter.

Wait until you see what Apple has been at for the last 15 years.

This doesn't track at all for me. Rust provides strong guarantees around accessing discriminated unions. The net effect of which is that the code you write has the "railway style" error handling that you get with exceptions in the trivial case (propagate the error). It even has a convenient syntactic shorthand for this `?`.

In non-trivial cases they are equivalent too. For example, collections need to maintain at a minimum a valid state in the presence of types with exception-throwing (fallible) constructors. This is a mess with or without exceptions in basically the same way. It's such a mess that the C++ standard allows for unspecified behavior of `std::vector::push_back` if the contained type has a throwing move constructor. Throwing move constructors are of course ridiculous but nonetheless allowed.

And that I would say is the biggest flaw with exceptions: they presume the fallibility of everything by default. This is not only brain damaging, it actively creates situations where there are no good options.

Making it impossible for them to operate a business in the US ought to be more than sufficient.

Let's not forget this gem https://archive.nytimes.com/dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/...

Personal emissions are framed as a moral issue by environmental activists. Those allied with the activists are perceived to be outsized users of air travel. And most air travel is non-essential.

Amongst users of air travel, it is a significant source of emissions. A single round-trip across an ocean is on the same magnitude as driving emissions for the average american.

The hypocrisy is obvious. Morality and personal responsibility are a terrible foundation for environmentalism.

I agree. I also want to note that Tesla has treated this subject like an opportunity to market and really done nothing to deserve the benefit of the doubt.

This is exactly why level 2 systems will never be safe. The constraints set the human up to fail.

You could ask the same questions about virtually every vehicle on the road. A model x weighs in at slightly over 2.5 tons. A model y is about 2.25 tons.

I'd rather see how it's implemented.

In my experience enterprisy abstractions are a lot of motion without any progress. They impede change and stymie understanding.

The cynical part of me thinks that is the whole point.

Anyone can mount a wheel. Clearly the author is talking about a hypothetical vehicle where the wheel has been welded to the axle assembly.

Actually replacing the tire on a wheel has practical engineering constraints that leave it best suited for shops. Even changing bicycle tires is non trivial and the performance and durability demands there are negligible in comparison.

Personally I've needed lots of batteries replaced and lost 1 phone to water damage. It's not at all clear to me that hermetic phone designs are the right tradeoff from a utilitarian perspective. On the other hand, if utilitarian phones sold better somebody would be making them.

Tires have obvious engineering constraints that presumably led to the current approach. Maybe a bit of path dependence as well. It's completely incomparable.

More like everyone in the city thinks they're the main character.

Clearly they're in the business of something else because the product isn't very compelling when it comes to browsing and searching.

You need to be able to build the code to even have a chance at that level of understanding of the source. And really you need to be able to build the code with a specialized toolchain. This is tractable with a huge investment if you get to choose or dictate your tools. If folks are bringing their own tools it is basically impossible.

Pushing for standardization of fact output from toolchains could be a path to getting somewhere when you can't dictate toolchains. Or really just having some kind of fact output from default toolchains would get you a long way.

I never claimed to know anything about the subject and I don't see how you got from what I said to "check your tone". I read the thread you linked and shared my own conclusions.

What I can say is that the explanation given is consistent with motives that make sense for the relevant parties. And I feel that was perfectly clear in the linked thread as well. And guess what, the involved parties are publicly saying things that are consistent with all this too!

I never mentioned or in any way disparaged "gamestonkers".

As to the rest of your comment: Actually understanding how this part of the financial system works is going to require a good deal more work than being the obtuse end of a discussion. And I expect you'll be disappointed with what you learn.

`fmt::print` isn't using the uninitialized variable in your example. After correcting that, it produces a report. https://godbolt.org/z/97bo3YTbc