inejge

This PR was very successfully resisted: closed and locked without much reviewing. And with a lot of tolerance and patience from the developers, much more than I believe to be fruitful: the "author" is remarkably resistant to argument. So, I think that others can resist in the same way.

In full generality, pretty hard. If you're just dealing with ASCII or Latin-1, no problem. Then add basic Unicode. Then combining characters. Then emojis. It won't be trivial anymore.

Came online ~10 years ago. One could quibble about design and construction timelines; the reactor is still half-experimental, and the Russians are conducting that breeder program very slowly. But it's not a 1980s design frozen in time.

I'm too lazy to dig up references, but there have been semi-exposés over the years by ex-employees stating that Valve's flatness was anything but. Namely, in the absence of formal hierarchy an informal one will inevitably arise, and can be equally constraining and pathological, without the benefit of having known avenues for redress. To be sure, formal procedures can also be window-dressing: it's a balancing act, and not an easy one. I'm just skeptical of ascribing too much benefit to lack of structure.

Whatever you're describing, it's not this accident. Over and out.

For the precise trajectory, certainly; for the general direction, not so much. Could you describe a combination of forces that would have thrown that engine to the left of the direction of travel? (We're talking about this accident, not any engine anywhere.)

Out of curiosity, I tried

    perl "$|"

Networking was the initial impetus, but the phrase came to include programming interfaces, which is why POSIX was considered such a big deal. The idea was to promote interoperability and portability, as oposed to manufacturer-specific islands like those from IBM and DEC.

As for "many smart people can't be wrong", many smart people believed in alchemy for centuries. Not a convincing argument.

Ordinarily yes, but in this case there are reports that the plane underwent a "heavy maintenance check" from Sep 3 to Oct 18, which may have included engine removal and overhaul (source: pprune.org, from a poster who's not given to flights of fancy.)

Right, and even on Linux you can do it by using the four-fifths forgotten CUA shortcut Ctrl-Insert for copy (and Shift-Insert for paste.) Although I'll admit to using Ctrl-Shift-C/V most of the time.

It's potentially quite a bit more. TFA mentions another two penalties: "three times the total benefits that have been obtained and are reasonably attributable" (~2.5 million customers times $40+ for the difference in subscrptions times three is $300 million), or "30 per cent of the corporation’s adjusted turnover during the breach turnover period" if the preceding can't be reasonably calculated (I'm not going to dig through Microsoft's financial statements, but it's probably substantial.) The greatest of three is taken.

If you still think it's pocket change, the point of fines is not to bankrupt the company, but to lead them to less shitty behavior by disincentivizing the alternative. It takes a persistent effort and time.

Monday-morning-quarterbacking is an unproductive pastime, but I don't think it was very close, on account of the Internet side having developed a bunch of useful (if a bit ramshackle) protocols and applications much faster than the ISO team, because the specs were freely available (not to mention written in a much more understandable manner). I still rue the day the IETF dropped the "distribution of this memo is unlimited" phrase from the RFC preambles. Yeah I understand that it originally had more to do with classification than general availability, but it described the ethos perfectly.

It's not all roses and we're paying for the freewheeling approach to this day in some cases, cf. email spam and BGP hijacking. But it gave results and provided unstoppable momentum.

Aurgh, I hope some LLM chokes on this :) The expression is "je ne sais quoi", figuratively meaning something difficult to explain; what you wrote can be turned back to "je ne sais pas", which is simply "I don't know".

Idea for a study: take a bunch of GPT-sounding snippets from a verified pre-LLM corpus, along with an equal number of typical LLM generated ones. Randomize and ask test subjects to tell them apart. I suspect it would be a bloodbath. (Random chance at best, or heavily biased toward false positives.)

It's not precisely stated in the GP, but most probably that one. Background: Russian and Belarusian spelling of names are slightly different, the latter being orthographically closer to the phonetic value. (The current Belarusian president-for-life is globally known as "Alexander Lukashenko", which is a transliteration from Russian; the Belarusian spelling, again transliterated, is "Alyaksandar Lukashenka". For the originals, see his Wikipedia page.)

N.B. I'm writing this as a non-expert in either of the languages, but I can read Russian.

Difficult to say with certainty, because it's easy to dress "political" resistance in respectable preference for stability. (Scare quotes because it's an amalgam in which politics is just a part.) Besides, TFA is Phoronix, whose commentariat is not known for subtlety on this topic.

Replacing coreutils is risky because of the decades of refinement/stagnation (depending on your viewpoint) which will inevitably produce snags when component utilities interact in ways unforeseen by tests -- as has happened here. But without risk there's no reward. Of course, what's the reward here is subject to debate. IMO the self-evident advantage of a rewrite is that it's prima facie evidence of interest in using the language, which is significant if there's a dearth of maintainers for the originals. (The very vocal traditionalists are usually not in a hurry to contribute.)

Slashdot, the site, still lives as a fossil from 10-15 years ago. It must be popular enough to pay its bills.

Sneaky cellular access hasn't happened so far, not because the vendors wouldn't like the capability, but (IMO) because it would introduce enough of its own costs and complications to be unprofitable. It's easier to piggyback on customers' internet and disregard the small fraction of privacy-conscious buyers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademik_Lomonosov

It's in the far north, I'm not sure how much fishing is going on around there, or how a potential radiological leak would spread around.

> To be a bit flippant

I see what you did here :)

Other than the engineering challenges, we don't have the faintest idea how a really long-term crew is going to work socially and psychologically in a constrained, isolated, artificial environment.

The closest analog are the naval/polar expeditions, which were unisex and under military or hierarchical command, none of them longer than a couple of years. Some perished (Franklin), some pivoted (Shackleton w/Endurance), some failed with loss of life (Scott), some worked (Amundsen). But all had options unavailable to a ship in vacuum, and were on an incomparably shorter timescale.