lambdaxyzw

One problem is that when refactoring it's easy to make a monster like "if (!notX()) ..."

My worst grade in school was German. Then, after graduating and when working my third programming job, I've started learning it again and I realized I'm actually really good at human languages (learning words and reading came naturally to me). It's just a school environment which stopped me.

>It prevents privacy issues

Next step: every big company/store requires a written authorization to enter. Back to square one.

I guess you could check if the pointer points inside a data section of your program, and if yes, call strlen on it. It's all so easy!

There's also chesterton fence - maybe this dumb thing in code actually was important some time ago. Or, even worse, maybe it is still an important for a rare edge case and you just don't see how, yet.

I don't agree with the GP at all, but I think it was pretty much established that money is not the primary reason people have less children. Perhaps obvious example, in general it's the rich countries that have problems with replacement rate and the poor countries pick up the slack (and not the other way around). For a more direct example, the populist government in my country started giving out money, no strings attached, to people with children, and the fertility didn't change at all (even declined a bit). So I think it's pretty clear we need other solution if we want to fix that.

One that trusts her partner? What kind of question is this.

I can't imagine my long term partner, now fiancee, wouldn't trust me with something so important to us both. Why even be in a relationship at this point.

>I'm sat there until I either realise that it's a scam or I give up

Well, there are ways to do this (for an easy example, just edit your hosts file). But the barrier of entry is high enough that a non technical person will give up even if they're completely oblivious.

Just pitching in to say this is also very important to me.

I wonder if the removal operation is not actually O(sqrt(n)). Depending on the way we structure thought experiment of course. But as the pile of spaghetti gets bigger, the act of picking the largest one is constrained by:

1. how fast your hand can reach for the next spaghetti piece - on average proportional to the radius of the pile of spaghetti, which is proportional to sqrt(n).

2. to actually notice the biggest piece, you need to again wait for a time proportional to sqrt(n) - light propagation is not instant.

So if we start thinking about this algorithm more like a computer scientist would (how fast it is as n grows to the infinity) it doesn't seem to be O(n) IMO.

Well it was cited so by definition it's citable.

I don't like discord but... The people doing research have chosen this method of collaboration. I like their research. Let's not be choosing beggars and tell them how to conduct their research.

>litter, trampling of grass/shrubbery

Obviously illegal, in public places too, do no relation to the topic discussed.

>theft

Come on. Theft is obviously illegal everywhere.

>idiots trying to pet or take pictures with livestock that weigh 20x what they do

Good thing is that it anyone is hurt in this scenario it's the idiot. Why worry about it?

>I literally can not imagine how bad it would be if people felt legally entitled to be there + how hard it would be to get law enforcement involved

I used to do a lot of hiking (in Spain, France, and some other European mountain ranges). Many remote routes go nearby or through someone's fields or even properties (like through someone's backyard). There are many farm animals on the trails or just next to them. Fortunately nobody here cares and we are all more happy because of it

>obviously responsible for (a child drowns in your pool because you didn't put up a fence)

Does this also count if you didn't invite the child and the terrain was clearly marked as your property? If yes, this is pretty surprising and non-obvious to me. Do i misunderstand something?

For me, the obvious example is bobby trapping your property and hurting a fireman who came to put out a fire.

>There were never any.

This is a bit unfair. Some people left OpenAI on the ground of ethics, because they were unsatisfied with how this supposed nonprofit operates. The ethics was there, but OpenAI got rid of it.

This is like saying that American or Canadian has little to no difference in terms of contemporary cultural background. Technically true, but it's still a bit rude to confuse both nationalities.

I am not too knowledgeable about black hole physics, but it was my understanding that there's nothing locally interesting about event horizon: it's just the point of no return that doesn't change much for the local observer. Your definition of the event horizon make it sound more locally important.

In fact, I know that as a local observer falling into a black hole you can still see some of the outside world after falling into the event horizon (by looking "behind you"), you just can't send anything back. This also seem to contradict the statement that all paths point inside (or I may misunderstanding something).

Edit again: I did some research and it looks like that while parent's comment may be true for simplified model of a black hole, it is conjured to be possible for rotating black holes where you can stay inside. Also Google "penrose diagram kerr black hole" for some weird physic if you want to follow this rabbit hole. Keep in mind that I'm not a physicist and this is my understanding after 40 minutes of watching YouTube and Wikipedia.

Well, it's not even 1% then, but 0.01%. 3.8 million vs 378400 millions.

Keep in mind that the crime occured earlier - when they got the dodgy funds somehow. If tornado cash didn't exist, they would just launder the money some other way (like people did for thousands of years before - and there's plenty of ways to launder money using cryptocurrencies).

Of course not, but merely using tornado cash would be enough to make many "regular" cryptocurrency exchanges refuse to work with you and/or ban you. Or even someone sending you transfer from tornado.cash, or receiving a transfer from someone that uses tornado cash. Tainting is unfortunately very inexact and heuristic based.

This it's also not what non-euclidean means. It's just regular 3d world with portals. Games of that era often used portals in the engine, they just didn't use them to implement impossible rooms. I'm not trying to be nitpicky, but it's a common misunderstanding.

For actual non-Euclidean stuff I recommend ZenoRogue stuff. For example a simple game with Nil geometry[1], giantic bossfight in non euclidean world rogue game[2], or some general geometry weirdness [3]. Or just check out any of their stuff.

[1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gejRg_q70EA&pp=ygUJemVub3JvZ3V...

[2] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jcnXI8IArRI&pp=ygUJemVub3JvZ3V...

[3] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yqUv2JO2BCs&pp=ygUJemVub3JvZ3V...

I seriously doubt it. I've tried to set up my (tiny) company email TLS-only, and had to backtrack two days later when two different customers complained that their emails were bounced. One of them was representing a major national bank. I've lost the last bit of hope for e-mail I had.

I'm ambivalent towards American politics, but that's an argument to be made that voting people (and media) don't think in timescales longer than 5 years, and it will be the humanity downfall if we don't focus on the Earth's long term problems. There are no easy solutions, and I don't pretend to have an answer, but "close your eyes and wait for our doom (or a miracle)" is not one.

>Go for a walk every day, and occasionally make your walk to an ATM?

There are workarounds, but it sounds annoying and a burden. What if the closest bank branch is an hour on foot away? Or the OP lives in a rural place and it's half an hour drive? I don't have this problem since my bank works with graphene, but I would reconsider using it if most applications I use refused to load.

Thank you, I missed the point of GP clearly. I use GrapheneOS and forgot you can't deny network access to an application in a "regular" Android.

Also they actually make it easy to use their services without providing any data - you can use them by paying Monero over tor, and the only thing identifying you is a short unique "identifying number" - no emails, no names, not even an account.

Which flashlight app? As far as I know there is no official flashlight app (though recently there is a built in flashlight feature). How is Google responsible for a third party app that refuses to work without an internet access?

If it's not possible to ethically deliver content on an ad-supported basis, then maybe we shouldn't allow it to exist, instead of excusing immoral thinks because "that's the only way to do it".

>If the viewer should screen out the advertisements, they are getting the benefits of programming while depriving the network of the benefits it hoped to realize by providing the content.

I find this idea disgusting. There are many kinds of contracts we don't allow - for example you can't sell yourself into slavery, even if you want to. Similarly I think that the "contract" you describe should not be allowed to exist, even assuming it's legally binding right now (and I doubt it).

>Everybody seems to understand this except for tech nerds

In my experience it's the other way around - everybody disagrees, except a tiny minority of people who benefit from the ad-supported monopoles.

Self reported? I'm not anxious about anything in my life. I'm worried about some things (line illness in my family), but I'm definitely not anxious over them and they never trouble me when going to sleep, for example.

Now, I'm not an entrepreneur though.

The point of certificate transparency is to have a public audit log of every certificate issued. Even if you had your own CA, you would be obliged to report every certificate you issue to the CT. This is a feature, not a bug.

You can set up your own certificate transparency listener, and get notified of every certificate created, in realtime, assuming you can handle the load. In my company we do this to scan new domains for potential phishing domains, to take them down before they become active.