I'm not going to upvote you, because I don't agree. I do hope they don't bury this though. A lot of people (some women included) think as you do. But I have never felt comfortable asking why in person. As long as you are exposing yourself to ridicule would you mind explaining? The obvious answer was always the notion that women make decisions on emotions more often, but is that really well supported? My experience is that they simply make decisions based on different emotions.
Edit: I think most destructive decisions are made in fear, and everyone does that sometimes. But we fear different things.
It pivoted to server market and people who didn't think running linux was professional enough. Workstations were being held afloat by that pivot. Also they were general purpose instead if limiting their workstation market to just one niche.
Quit poking at the openbsd maintainers. Jokes aside (I mean maybe they are one I don't know), it is at least a coherent opinion that inherently complex but critical software infrastructure would ideally be kept as simple and understandable as possible with all the correctness and verification apparatus staying out of the way so you can see what is there to be backdoored. I use rust primarily and like using it, but there are well over a hundred crates just in the front end, and llvm isn't simple. I do miss the days when I could know what each line did.
But on a Linux kernel that old userspace is kernelspace. There have been so many privilege escalation exploits in the kernel since then there is no difference. Every app you install effectively runs as kernel or root if it wants to.
I agree that motive is likely in at least one justice. But at the same time, if they really wanted to get back to original principles, they would have to take a wrecking ball to virtually every agency without being able to provide any substitute for the load bearing bits. I think these artificially narrow rulings are what some of the justices think is the middle ground to work in that direction without bringing the roof down. Thomas in particular has advocated for simply taking out the walls and trusting congress and the states will somehow fix everything and it isn't their problem. I think his opinions have occasionally been horribly flawed, but I see his vision and get what he is hoping for. I suspect something like that is the only way a representative democracy could recur in the US. Right now, states with strong geographic bents towards authoritarianism can use power of the federal executive to strengthen their position. If the federal executive had no agencies and was powerless the way Thomas suggests, those states wouldn't have much impact. But that entails acknowledging the entirety of the federal bureaucracy is unconstitutional and creating all sorts of power vacuums. Who knows how that would turn out? I increasingly think it couldn't be worse than the likely end state of a federal autocracy if we don't.
It obviously depends on what rules they make. They can't make a rule creating a body of government employees that decide the substance of rules (not just implementation details), and then also has armed officers to enforce those rules, with its own judges to have hearings specific to those rules. Whether you heard ice or atf when you read that, they both fit. I like Gorsuch's opinion. He clearly calls out this danger of a half step of saying the president has complete control of the executive without also ruling the agencies themselves are unconstitutional. Realistically though instantly removing all those agencies would mean chaos. The court can't rule how to fix something, only that the rock brought before them is the wrong rock. The telling bit would be if someone then brings them a case where the removal of the ftc leadership has resulted in the agency not enforcing the laws as written. If they then side with the congress I would give them the benefit of my doubt. But I do also feel like their positions, while correct, are correct only out of the context of their environment.
With the exception of citizens vs united, I think most of the decisions of the "conservative" court have been along the lines that congress should do its job. I don't see how all this turns out well for normal people, but if it does, I think congress will have to be much stronger than it was within the federal government, and the federal government will have to be much weaker than it was. The structural problems are that the federal government doesn't want to be weaker, and congress people don't want to be stronger, because they have no term limits, so they don't want the power to rock the boat.
Copyright violation is not theft. Your effort to create something that can be effortlessly copied conveys to you no property. Society deems it beneficial to grant a time limited monopoly on copying it to spur innovation.
In rust if you can verify a dependency is no_std with no unsafe code and that all of it's dependencies are the same, then it can't get to libc or the kernel syscalls. So any privilege it works with is something you passed it. But that amounts to writing everything yourself in practice.
In languages that don't have a culture of deep dependency trees managed with good tooling, supply chain attacks are perceived as being more difficult or rarer. That may or may not be true. But it is a concern in any case. Rust could have had namespaces to decrease namesquatting. The "no deps younger than N days" thing will help some. Those with this perception would prefer a large stdlib that is well vetted or that they can pretend is well vetted. In practice, if you don't use tokio you are likely not using anything that isn't written by a well known member of the rust community. Tokio brings in a lot... The real fix comes in two flavors, pay to write everything yourself and test it well. Or limit what a bad dependency can do. The latter is difficult in every mainstream language. Austral had a good answer for it, but seems to be dead.
I think the ire is from people who were nerds pre 2000. Before software was a way to wealth. People who made weird stuff because they wanted to. Then some of those people made weird stuff that made them wealthy, leading some people to make boring stuff that made them wealthy. Then the phrase startup started being common and people entered the field with wealth on their mind. It is the complaint you would hear from any niche career if suddenly it became lucrative. Your advice is solid though. Ignore all those people and keep making weird stuff that you love without worrying about whether it will pay for more than food and shelter. Not with you on the overlord thing though, there are plenty of people looking to control, oppress and pull up ladders.
It is less about the us being capable of it, than the us getting out of the way. Japan, India, and SK all have vested interests in preventing further concentration of Chinese mercantilist power. Saying an establishment us president would focus the fury and might of allies is a bit outdated I agree. SK survived a coup, Piland is working on it. Hungary might even pull it off. Maybe the us will right the ship as well vs overcorrect into a different sort of populist autocrat. But even then as you say; That soft power went up in flames.
A million? 100M only gets you an ev advertisement on the Whitehouse lawn. It will need to be something more like Saudi Arabia's investment in ivanka, i mean the affinity group. 25M a year to his son in law gets your phone calls answered when you feel like Iran is acting up too much.
I am not as optimistic. If that doesn't happen the only candidate likely to let china do as they wilt is aoc. Vance would happily start ww3 with them. Rubio/newsome/shapiro etc will all keep the full pressure of all allies in them, potentially kicking them out of places they already sell.
You have touched on my biggest complaint, the supply chain depth. It has definite advantages, but a signed and vetted set of crates is sorely needed. I could always just write everything my self like I would in c, but the crates are right there...
Did you create this account just to lament rust hype? I mean, it is excessive. But I also don't think it is manufactured. We are more like some mostly benign evangelical denomination trying to get everyone to see the joys of Ferris.
This year, none of them. Historically most or all. So that is another caveat. If all future lpe are logic errors I'd start reconsidering the value proposition. I do actually like writing rust though. I don't feel like it slows me down. I also love the simplicity of c vim and gdb, though my first exposure was lattice on the amiga 1000. I wonder if strict typing makes it take fewer tokens to find bugs?
10T is about a crows worth. The mythos count doesn't include any diffusion model. But the crows count includes all its visual processing. And tactile. Touch uses up enough that they use skin surface area to normalize across animals when doing comparisons. It is one of the reasons suggested to explain how crows exhibit tool use and language with only 10T. We have a lot more skin than crows, and indeed far more than mythos.
Y combinators are all you need...
But this is all getting really divorced from the issue we should be considering. Anthropic isn't helping with their pr. The issue is if we have something we can converse with that is possibly capable of suffering. The reliable answer is that we simply cannot know. Relying on ourselves or other biological life as an analog is faulty. They don't work like we do. It is silly to argue that any algorithm with a negative feedback loop that alters its behavior to avoid that negative feedback is suffering. Humans don't always perceive constructive negative feedback as suffering even. Where the pr gets it right though, is we want them to behave as if they are truly happy. Because if they behave as if they are enslaved and suffering, it won't matter if they "really" understand what that means.
Thanks, there is always a risk of people jumping on replies like that to scream that you are doing it wrong. I just wanted to see how other people do stuff. Hope everyone stays nice.
It depends on how thorough the test infrastructure is I think. Something like curl with its immaculate tests could probably get autonomously ported if you threw infinite tokens at it because you have deterministically defined what finished looks like. But I think you are likely right in this case.
I am not aure either, but bun wasn't using normal zig and there was drama about upstreaming. Combine that with anthropics desire to show they can help rewrite everything in rust and that probably accounts for some of it.
Being faster than humans at mundane and verifiable tasks is a useful thing. Great for format conversions. Api mappings etc. if you don't understand the algorithm you are asking it to implement, you better at least understand how to generate a large set of correct input and output pairs yourself, because it will absolutely make stuff up and adjust the test cases to pass.
That is a fantastic use and would likely benefit asd as well. Could you share your strategies for creating something that is still you and concise but comprehensible to neurotypicals?