kaba0

The Nakba is not without prior history either.

It's simply the most complex sociopolitical issue on Earth today, if not ever in human history, it can't be "summed up" in some hot take.

I don't think this "claim to land" works in the modern age.

Countries were established and fought for in blood all thorough history, and the winners kept their land. End of story.

Unless we are talking about some remote village, every single country was funded on blood and violence, and after a certain point it just makes no sense to track it.

"The Jewish people are an ethnoreligious group.."

From Wikipedia. You are absolutely wrong here, it is as much an ethnicity as it is a religion.

"Palestinian" didn't mean anything before, it's just the name of a land where Jews and Arabs coexisted.

Would you be okay with being responsible for the never before seen bloodshed that would result in, with millions of innocent people dying as the direct result of your actions?

Maybe the "solution with the lowest Kolmogorov complexity".

In a sibling comment, I replied that usually a repeating pattern can also be applied, but that one usually requires storing the n-sequence, rarely making it the shortest encodable rule.

This is exactly what I hated about these kind of questions!!

Or just, the pattern simply repeats for the n next number.. like come on, there is no objective metric for which rule is "better".

The implementation details don't matter. LLMs not being able to properly reason though is a fundamental limitation and no amount of re-running will help.

Nation/culture != the current regime

But it's not itself, it's an array of characters. It's AST can be represented as simply as a recursive list data structure (with a head and a tail), but I think this is a bit over-mysticized.

Well, foreign projects communicating with each other is always ground for a mess, but this is not an either-or question.

Also, your mileage may vary based on the niche you are working on - in case of, say java, the initial setup of the build system may not be "fun", but it will just work from then on.

More like there were actually multiple vendors that would have to agree on a common thing, but they died out so the single leftover can do whatever it wants...

Miro board is simply unusably slow, but plenty of other commonly used websites have annoying breakages, like login screen not actually logging in and the others.

> Or they could do what Brave, Vivaldi and others do and simply use Chromium as a base.

Don't you even see the problem?!

Even Microsoft dropped out from developing a web browser, it literally has a larger scope than a whole OS.

But sure, enjoy your Chrome OS proprietary "open" web.

Sure. Continuing my analogy to the British empire's rule over the seas has also surely resulted in technological improvements, but that is not the only way to achieve that.

For a more practical example, Linux is also developed mostly by paid employees, but they are from many different companies and thus improvements can't be weaponized as easily.

Try using a miro board. Unfortunately many sites have started breaking under Firefox, and it's a shame that web devs don't test under the 3 remaining browser, at least on a surface-level, before release.

It's not like supporting a completely different OS..

So why are those standards impossible to keep up with and we already see plenty of sites break under Firefox? Which by the way is the only independent browser remaining in game, even goddamn Microsoft leaving the domain behind?

I do mostly agree with grandparent, but not with your take.

What is the problem with government regulating, say, the ingredients that can be used in foods, forbidding addictive drugs from being added to them? Or selling drugs that are completely fake or outright dangerous?

This obsession with small governments (and basically, libertarianism) doesn't really stand on proper grounds.

Why can't the government work for you? Maybe it's an inherent bias given that I'm from Europe, but I think the stereotypical utopia about "big government" is much more true for huge corporations (which have absolutely no safety mechanisms built in to prevent a paper clip factory going overboard in the name of profit) compared to the slow-moving, democratic, slightly corrupt governments. Only one of these have accountability in a humane form, while the only metric for corporate is a single number.

I think what people fail to see is that this is the same as "owning the sea by the British Empire" or "owning the railroads/roads". The economical benefit is not direct monetary gain, but nonetheless absolutely huge, and basically plays outside the "normal" rules.

Google can use their web dominance to push another service of their, or cripple a competitor's in a completely different domain.

Both. My phone could easily serve thousands of concurrent users.

The second point is absolutely fair and your project is very cool and impressive, but the speed one is misleading. I am fairly sure you actually leave a fair bit of performance on the table simply by how convoluted parallelism and async IO are in C, and something like Java might easily outperform it in standard CRUD backend use cases.

Still, why would I want to write C?

Then use a script language with similar memory semantics, PHP started out exactly that way, if I'm not mistaken.

Hi, is there some further info on iOS "internals" like this? I was always interested in how it works, but I found much less information compared to android (which obviously makes sense given one is more or less open-source), even though these probably don't fall in the secret category.

Well, generics are mostly meant for library code. Just because you don't need it, doesn't mean that code you use doesn't need it.

Given human events, he was not wrong in that conclusion. (If we even consider ourselves super intelligent)

I believe we were only the 3rd most intelligent on Earth, or something like that? Both dolphins and mouse being more intelligent.

I mean, CPUs do a bunch of work to make us believe they still operate just as a fast PDP-11, and I would wager that besides compiler experts that work on the backend parts of compilers, not many people have a real feel for modern hardware (obviously besides those that actually work on that given hardware).

So I'm not convinced that even those who think they know how it works know it actually.

My point is that even that little can sometimes lead to less pleasant experiences, like stepping half a function's body ahead.

Logging can change timing issues though. There are too many cases where an added log statement "fixed" a race condition, simply by altering the timing/adding some form of synchronization inherent in the logging library.

Why not both? For any sufficiently complex app you will have some form of logging either way, and then you can further pinpoint the issue with a debugger.

Also, debuggers can do live evaluation of expressions, or do stuff like conditional breakpoints, or they can just simply add additional logs themselves. They are a very powerful utility.

I mean, even then c/CPP will optimize out stuff and you won't get as nice one-to-one mapping as you do with eg. Java.