why did they find the need to rename this? Am i missing something?
1,337 karma · joined August 28, 2019
let's not freak out - you can't "steal" open-source code, they used an incompatible license. that was accidentally too free.
people monetizing something you open-source isn't stealing.
you should shop at "walmart" or where-ever your dollar is the most effective. and that gives you the most stability and and position to challenge whether the current Walton regime's love of China is a good thing or not. but cutting your nose off to spite your face does nothing useful.
probably you too. awesome people sometimes screw up, but that's OK. if you really still think that "everyone sucks" then maybe you are in the 5%
i'm guessing they will be available in a month or so - they are supposed to "Q2" but seem to be a little bit late (as is typical).
286 protected modes, sure.
16-bit 8086, no way. difficulty of use did not hinder.
celebrating proper 32-bit protected modes, absolutely agree. but x86 was still well liked and used and was not the clunker that 286 was.
agree.
and how does decommissioning 2200 chargers cost $50M - $100M? that's $22K - $44K each.
you turn the breaker off. you don't need to rip the chargers out.
regardless of whether or not you think it's a good idea, breathlessly inflating it to "might be" a billion dollars does not convince me more.
> the other comments in the subthread are still indexed, visible & tend not to get moderated/flagged
indexed: please complain to google.
visible: not unless you turn on show-dead. so don't do that.
don't get moderated: they are already dead.
> I'm as much of a fan of adverbs
i mean what i said. i'm extremely tired of seeing histrionics and exaggerations, misplaced blame, etc. turned into loud, unfair, criticism toward what is probably the best moderated group i can think of.
JWZ's banner is at least recognizable as satire, and his opinions are well known. i can disagree with him, but still find it a little bit funny (and immature). but if you do the same thing (yes, with a please), then you are just exactly as mature. and if you are serious, less grounded in reality and not nearly as funny.
this is always true with, at least a great many, people. it's related to choosey-beggar syndrome. it's a bug/glitch/feature in human psychology.
if you ever have the chance to be a property manager, never ever let someone move in a week early or pay a week later for free. never let your rent get drastically below market. when people aren't paying for something, it's incredibly common behavior to stop respecting it. it's like a switch flips and suddenly they are doing you the favor.
that's why in times past, offering or taking "charity" was considered impolite. but making a small excuse might be ok. say someone needs to stay an extra week after their lease was over, but was strapped for cash. instead of saying "sure you can stay one more week", say "well, you'd really be doing me a small favor staying in the place to watch for the extra week since it's empty anyway. how about i discount the rent by 50% for that week and amend the lease to take care of it."
saying things like "an organized attempt to destroy lives, including of developers in our communities" is patently not true. trolls get flagged. honest nice people who don't agree with you aren't trying to destroy anything and nor do they hate you.
so that's what your part is
> all I did was direct composer to do what I was thinking of
yes.
> fresh grads and interns aren't seen as idea guys that can get stuff done, they're seen as useless ticket monkeys to be herded by seniors.
only if that's what you are
> Now Cursor Composer is the ticket monkey presumably to be herded by a senior, not me
wait, so you just "successfully" herded that ticket monkey, so why not by you? seniors are just juniors that haven't quit yet for longer than you.
here's my take: say you lived before levers were invented. you train and train to be strong enough to lift 200lb blocks of stone by brute force.
levers are invented. now everyone, even puny weaklings, can now lift those 200lb blocks faster and without getting tired. did you waste all that time training to lift 200lbs?
or do you just start lifting 2000lb blocks now?
it's just an inanimate lever. it does not reduce or increase "work" (F x D) or "power" (W / t).
so what do you do? the same thing that every good engineer has ever done - be a good engineer. that's what isn't going to be replaced. being a code monkey is probably going to be replaced, but that was never what you should have been in the first place.
in your view, a code monkey is a tool that seniors used to use to get stuff done and multiply their force. now they can use the new lever of composer and AI instead. so what? code monkeys are being replaced by AI composers, not engineers.
engineers are those who, regardless of seniority, understand how things work and the best technologies at the moment, trade approaches, make intelligent choices, and then make it happen. new tech like AI is just something new to understand and add to the equation.
i think the problem is that in recent years, the economy has favored and conflated code-monkeys with engineers and tried to train and pay them as such. well, that crap was going to end anyway.
first, what is "personally escorted to school on a horse" supposed to be? and if he had private tutors, why did he only get 80%? and, regardless of the background, is not 80% still objectively better than 79%?
second, your example is about financial inequality. rich vs. poor. you're trying to paint a picture of a spoiled rich kid vs. a grubby gritty motivated poor kid.
but DEI is about "your color defines your opportunity" not your wealth. well, yes some races/color are over/under represented in rich/poor. but that converse is not necessarily true for individuals - an individual being a particular shade does not imply his privilege.
what happens when Billy is a wealthy minority and Cody is neither? and rich minority Billy got a 65% and Cody got a 95%? do you still give the job to Billy? because in the past people that looked like Cody were evil to people who looked like Billy? we cannot solve inequity by creating more of it.
If you are truly for equality and are able to see past what’s right in front of your nose, you’ll realize life is inherently unfair. But promoting literal racism is not going to make up for multiple generations of harm. by punishing those who had nothing to do with that harm. based on the same racism that led to the harm.
VAX or 68K would be cleaner CISC ISA to learn first.
8086 (16 bit) x86 has the advantage of being ubiquitous and you can run on "hardware" everywhere. but the disadvantage of being a little weird wrt. segment registers. x86 32-bit is complicated, but at least flat memory space and you can mostly ignore the segments.
MIPS or one of the RISC-V variants is a second one to learn to contrast RISC load/store with CSIC.
the contract between user and "maker" should be requirements. if a machine does not fulfill its requirements, it can be the maker's responsibility, for example a flight instrument that failed to report correct information.
but if you choose to use a piece of software that says "we actually guarantee nothing", which is the vast majority of it, then it's definitely the user's responsibility for choosing to use such a tool.
passive aggressive threats (and that is exactly what they are) are not a technical discussion. you can be polite or blunt. you can be nasty or you can be good. but don't confuse polite for for good or blunt for nasty - some of the nastiest meanest behavior is packaged in a nice and polite delivery.
it seems like to me that the rust team fundamentally doesn't understand their role and position. they're showing up to a house that somebody else built and instead of saying "how can i help", they are saying "i have this cool thing, can we add it to your house so we can play too". at first, being bohemian open-source people, the kernel guys say "sure". but then it becomes problematic because it isn't free or easy and there are impacts. and they never asked for it in the first place.
100% the best thing for them to do is go build their own house. why do they even want rust in a 40 million SLOC "C" project? go create a kernel in rust. they could even leverage existing Linux drivers or other components. then it's their house to do what they want, the way they want. figure out how to box up "unsafe" "legacy" filesystems and drivers in their own rust ecosystem.
crypto is like many other things in which if you make ONE TINY mistake you are doomed. point taken. do your due diligence. but also don't trust randos. or the NSA and probably NIST. therefore most so-called experts.
if hell is "overconfident" developers, then what is "overconfident experts". or "overconfident furry apologists for crypto experts"? also hell.
crypto is hard. we get it. you're also no better than anyone else at it.
and now won't apologize or give them back.
my appologies to Bryan Cantrill
this is a magazine article, not a proof. so i'm certain the author felt it was relevant to say it that way because the whole article is about what happens in the body, whether or not it was logically relevant to the condition.
the fact that he made a narrower than necessary true statement does not imply he meant anything beyond that either, even if you read it pedantically. it takes extraordinary effort to maintain a constant suspicion that every unstated condition might be relevant too.
the fact it doesn't add more, possibly irrelevant, information does not diminish its usefulness.
it does not imply anything about things that aren't being discussed. it's abnormal to read everything with a qualification like "in our bodies" as a implication of some other hidden meaning.
as technical people we probably enjoy delving into tangents and pedantry far too much. but, for example, adding a statement "... In fact, iodine is an element and cannot be synthesized ... " would be a tangent and should be avoided or edited out.
the realization is that this is a binary choice, either we ban it or we don't. but we shouldn't be in this position in the first place. neither choice is the right answer. i don't want any of the outcomes. i don't want a chinese facebook. i don't want a us controlled facebook. i don't want a facebook controlled facebook.
you want to know how to keep giant governments out of your shit (us and china and russia, etc.)? how to keep giant corporations out of your knickers? if you favor economic protectionism, how to keep other countries from undermining your industries? how to keep giant corporations (us or chinese) from exploiting their monopolies to wreck our culture just so they can serve more advertisements?
everyone on this forum, especially if you decry this ban, needs to stop defending, accepting, and allowing closed monopolistic computing and networking. app-store monopolies, for instance, secure-boot, device-non-ownership. we've given these companies persistent 100% control over our own devices and we (as surprised as you are) got monopolies. now we have to argue about which flavor of monopoly we want.
the minute, via app store policy or via crypto/secure boot, you allow a company to select what i am or am not allowed to do, see, or buy on my own devices - this is what we are doomed to deal with as a result.
"don't worry, all the work has warranted by New Quality Roofing Services IV, LLC"
although, there's very little about that structure that's unique to an LLC. it can be done the same with a corporation.
i'm certain this only works when the amount of debt being ripped off (ahem in dispute) is not a lot more than the cost to sic a really good law firm on you.
then don't root your phone or download an .exe. having the ability to do something doesn't mean you are forced to do it.
not safe enough for you? fine! make the current status quo comfortable walled-garden-of-illusionary-fake-safety the default. for example, there's no reason windows needs to by default allow unsigned code to run. hell, even make it really annoying to turn off.
but the "safety" and "easy to use" arguments against right-to-repair, digital rights, ownership, etc. is simply nonsense. there is literally ZERO negative safety or usability impact to anyone else's device because i'd like to own mine.
it's also an insulting and disingenuous argument to hear anyone on this forum make: our careers and entire segment of the economy would not exist if it were not for open systems. and it's insulting to basically say "bubba/granny is too dumb to be trusted" with owning their own device.
wait, when was this? is there a linkable example? (i don't doubt you, but that's pretty bad)
in either cases it's still highly apropos to the engineering analogy.
did you (hypothetically) add an unnecessary statement because you observed "good" programs doing it and believed if you did the same your program would be better? or because you thought you were facilitating something that was needed to be done to support something that isn't needed or won't happen? to me these are two sides of the same coin.
i've seen these kind of things (these are quick examples of the top of my head, not the worst things by far):
const char *str = "hello\0"; // make sure it's null terminated
if (ptr != NULL) free(ptr); // don't free if not allocated