dreta

Why bother protecting any data, if you can put a footnote in your ToS.

Nobody’s saying FB’s the victim. It’s their fault, if anything. People are „unduly” influenced all the time, and by everybody. Saying CA somehow worse than anybody else just because they worked for people you don’t like is disingenuous. It’s FB that should be held accountable here; they gave away people’s personal data to a third party.

I don't find CS-level mathematics difficult, but still failed it twice during first semester because at that time it's the most boring, and pointless thing you can learn when trying to become a proffessional programmer.

I picked everything up by myself later after learning computer graphics and AI, since that's when, for me, algebra and calculus became something more than a grade. Derivatives "clicked" for me because i needed to know how to calculate a root value using Newton's method.

I do lack fundamentals, and i do suffer because of that, but over the years i came to the conclusion that i won't understand something if i don't care, and that's just how things are. The education system tends to front-load theory, and i can't learn for the sake of learning. Maybe it's the same for you.

Nobody's arguing that volatile has anything to do with CPU cache, or barriers, or locks, or any other nonsense! volatile is there to ensure that the compiler generates code that accesses the variable directly each time, which is necessary to write correct multi-threaded code. If you don't use volatile, and your code still works, then either the compiler's smarter than you, or you got lucky. End of story. The level of misunderstanding you guys are showing on the matter is beyond comical.

volatile's one of the simplest modifiers to understand if you care to actually learn the language. It has a clear, and well-defined purpouse, and i have no idea how you can spend so much time, and energy arguing that that's not the case.

> And if you're not properly taking your locks before accessing your variables, `volatile` is not going to save you.

Yes, it will! Just because you’re accessing shared variables doesn’t mean you need locks. This is what volatile is for!

You’re blindly hoping the compiler will do the right thing for you, anyway. You must have little-to-no experience writing multi-theaded code in production, let alone anything more advanced that doesn’t rely on locks.

Nobody’s arguing that volatile somehow bypasses the cache. When it comes to multithreading, that doesn’t matter though, because the whole process works with the cache, and the CPU keeps core caches synchronized. Memory barriers do nothing here.

Seriously, you’re arguing rubbish.

It absolutely is not useless. You're the one confused. I never claimed it's a synchronization construct, or that it magically makes your code thread-safe.

No amount of fences or mutexes is going to help you if threads are operating on their own version of a variable that got cached in a register, or optimised away. You need to understand volatile to write correct multi-threaded code.

That StackOverflow answer is bogus, along with all the other comments. It's just a rant that, albeit correct, is barely related to the question asked, and it's a clear example why you shouldn't treat StackOverflow as more than an unreliable help forum. The guy asked about whether you should make variables shared inside of a critical section volatile. The answer is "yes, to prevent threads from working on stale data".

>`volatile` has pretty much no correct uses outside of accessing registers in low-level code

Sorry, but what are you guys on about? You use "volatile" if you don't want the compiler to produce code that caches a variable. You use it all the time in embedded systems, or when writing multi-threaded code, etc. The usage of "volatile" is very clear, and should be well understood. "restrict" isn't used much because it's a c99 standard first of all, and second of all, it's like "inline"; it might make a difference, might not, and not a lot of people are in a situation where they have to shave off cycles.

Considering that half of that is not standard C code, and the other is just a standard way of declaring a pointer that doesn’t differ much in any other typed language, i don’t think you’re making a point here.

This is just stacking one bias on top of another. Wikipedia is not a credible source of information, especially when it comes to topics like politics or conspiracies, and refering to it selectively is a clear statement on its own.

IMHO it would be much more productive to tell people to be extremely sceptical towards everything they see on the internet. YouTube is very capable of launching a successful campaign to do that. I'm sure a lot of creators would jump on board, and, seeing what's most likely to go viral these days, it seems necessary. This is obviously in direct conflict with the business model of platforms like YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook, since they rely on ad ravenue, so we're stuck with orwellian solutions like the one presented.

I think it's a case of Google strongly enforcing their policies within the company, and not doing anything to combat moderation bias, rather than them delibelatery targeting different political views. I think, as usual, people are looking for malice where incompetence would suffice; in this case, Google failing to foster a culture of acceptance, and understanding towards a wide range of political views, given that they're a global company.

Either way, silencing political views is like fighting fire by turning off the fire alarm. I think everybody should be worried by actions like these, because this breeds radicalism by empowering one side, and making the other side feel threatened. This isn't good for anybody.

It can hardly be called a mistake when the same doesn’t happen to people and channels that align themselves politically with Google’s internal policies and culture.

Google can do as they please, YouTube is theirs, but you can’t seriously accept statements like these at face value.

What top public figures aren't strongly against racism exactly?

You can’t make the law any more strict than it already is without sacrificing everybody’s basic rights.

It’s ridiculous how acceptable it has become for everybody to bully Russia.

If you’re not affraid of risk, why not start your own company.

I’ll never unionise simply because I think it’s immoral to strong-arm your employer when they’re the one to take the burden, and risk of running a company, while offering me the benefits of a stable job. If you don’t like your situation, you can always leave, and find something better, or start your own business.

You could say it's quite boring.

The fact that you have to know a dozen major technologies just to make basic UI that breaks half of the time should make you feel awful as an engineer.

A link to an ad for, as far as you or me can tell, a fantasy book doesn't constitute an argument.

That's a very roundabout way of saying they won't ban Donald Trump because he's keeping Twitter relevant.

Instead we let the US do as they please on our soil, and politely ask for visas promised to us 4 cadencies ago. All it takes is a radically anti-interventionist US president and we’re left to fend for ourselves against the angry Russians with our outdated F-16s. Germany has better ties with Russia than us.

Masturbating to yourself sounds pretty niche.

I wanted to find out more about the author, because the post looked interesting. Should not have started with Twitter. Why do people feel the need to wear their political agenda on their sleeve so much in this industry.

"I love writing opinionated blog posts that make dudes go all ape shit and territorial if I didn’t do it the same way as them. Think for yourselves :) there can be more than one way ya doofuses it’s all about what your personal tradeoffs are."

Is this the kind of response you want to have to people sharing their opinions on a public forum; having a productive discussion that you started.

Lobbying.

If you're going to quit your job, and put your savings on the line, do it for something that doesn't look so generic and uninspired.

I read that, stopped caring, and closed the tab.

The knowledge presented in the slides isn’t deep; it’s essential. Can’t imagine a C programmer not knowing that parts of an expression can be executed in arbitrary order. Especially that this is aimed at embedded C programmers. It’s more like playing chess not knowing what „en passant” is.

It’s more useful to have standard Linux installed, unless you’re incredibly sensitive about security. I treat Chromebooks as cheap Linux machines. You can buy a brand new netbook, and you know Linux will run on it with no driver issues. It’s still chroot, but you get everything you need to do development.

This is an article written by the biggest fan of a guy with an inflated ego, a child-like view of the world, and nothing to show.

I’m sick and tired of articles like that popping-up on this site. This is not Twitter. Why is irrelevant political content not flagged immediately.