verbatim

Interesting. The article states "The compiler prints the value as a given variable changes." -- surely it means the program does, and not the compiler?

At the end of the article he states that the next step is to work toward safe Rust.

Puzzling that the page has a headline declaring it "Proudly anti-fascist", but has nothing in the FAQ/About explaining what that means in this context.

Most of it is part of the core language now.

You can make a burner email account that doesn't track you around the web, and other places.

Is it possible to do that with a Facebook account?

I have the same issue. My suspicion is that this is going to be analyzed as a serious safety concern at some point.

It seems that headlights got much brighter to benefit the driver behind them, without any consideration that they blind everyone else -- and also reduce the ability for peoples' eyes to adjust to dim conditions. That can't be a good trade-off.

> It is still just calories in and calories out.

The problem with this line of thinking is the "just".

Sure, physics says it's calories in and out, and we all agree that mostly makes sense.

But -- how do you measure how many calories are going out? Sleep is known to have an impact on weight. How does one translate their sleep quality or sleep issues into a better "out" measure? How do you know how many calories are going out during all of the other things you do during the day? What about the thousands of assorted complex processes going on in your body that you aren't really aware of?

For the "in"... ok, so you studiously track everything you eat. What's the efficiency that your body absorbs all of the calories from the food you ate? How many of those calories pass through and aren't actually consumed? Is eating 1000 calories of lettuce really the same thing as eating 1000 calories of pork?

If fixing this for people was just about "the equation", weight loss would be a lot easier to solve.

"Calories in, calories out" is one of those things that sounds great, but is not nearly as practical for people to actually implement as people like to imagine.

Presumably most of these are accidental, which makes that an ill-fitting term.

I made a similar call after an Amazon courier recently left two packages on the roadside nowhere near my house (where they are normally left at the door).

They added instructions to my account indicating which door the packages should be left at. So far, about 50% of the deliveries have been at a different door, but at least they've made it to the house.

I've always assumed that the answer is that due to the way email works, mail can, in certain (rare) situations, end up stuck in a queue somewhere between mail servers and not delivered until a couple days later.

Saying that unsubscribing takes a few days means that in the off-chance that this happens, the sender has some coverage against annoyed users who have one of these mails delivered after unsubscribing.

But this is just my guess.

In a world where CPUs now require microcode updates to run securely, it's not very obvious that this is bad behavior.

Maybe erring on the side of safety here makes sense?

How does it spy on you?

How many of these items are not also available in a standard Linux configuration?

But it is. Dawkins' meme was an idea that spreads person to person. So are the modern internet-spread image macro memes. The catching on and spreading is what makes it a meme and not just an image.

The confusion is that the latter meaning of "meme" has started drifting from "an image macro that spreads" to "an image macro".

That may realign it, but it doesn't mean you're good at it. Maybe Joe-Z fails in the other direction, writes off tons of people as untrustworthy (incorrectly) for no reason, and hasn't realized it.

Actually, I run Thunderbird on Linux and have frequent issues with it pausing and hanging on me. (Among other issues related to it seemingly just having trouble handling large amounts of email -- but that's not important to dive into here.)

Let's not act like other complex software isn't also likely to end up with similar issues.

The off-brand that invented x86-64? :)

If you're using Thunderbird 11, you are using a mail client full of security issues.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/known-vulnerabilities...

> Crypto currencies are worthless unless they have an enormous amount of hashing power behind them.

I think this is only true if you assume that crypto-currencies must be based on proof-of-work algorithms.

What about proof of stake systems?

This article doesn't seem to explain why they have a hard dependency on a proprietary tool to flash the firmware.

There are no alternatives to AFUEFI?

This sure looks like a crisis for a grocery store.

It didn't say it was a crisis for the population.

Your assumption that "someone else paid for it" only holds if the price was directly tied to external costs and not their own profit.

They tend to be speed targets in many places, because if you drive under (or at) the speed limit in many places, you'll get hassled by aggressive drivers behind you, creating a more dangerous situation than if you sped up instead.

(Based on my experience driving in the US, at least.)

How do you determine the dollar value if there aren't solid exchanges where people are buying and selling the coin?

Just a guess, but, one factor could be a shorter warranty?

Quality in video games is certainly more objective than in painting. There are a lot of aspects of a video game that are not fully subjective: does it have a control scheme that feels good and generally works, does it run well, does it have a reasonable difficulty level or on-ramp for learning to play it, etc.

In judging painting, you don't end up with a lot of complaints about things like "I like the way it looked but it kept falling off of my wall", whereas if you have an unstable game...

I'm not sure if it's ironic, or fitting, that the end of the article is a piece of artwork credited only as "Please let me know if you know the source of this image."

There have been efforts trying to do the exact opposite of this, and enable reproducible builds.

Being able to compile code and get the same byte-for-byte result as someone else (i.e. a distribution shipping you binaries) can help eliminate concerns about binaries being tampered either accidentally or intentionally. This is a valuable security feature for some.

I'm not sure how the Linux kernel handles these, but in some projects, this is intentional, the goal being to land the fix and make everyone safe before knowledge of how to exploit the bug is widely known.

Of course, sometimes just fixing up code for stability reasons may close a security hole that isn't really known or understood yet.

Not sure which was happening here.

The longstanding question posed by Vampire Weekend has finally been answered: Oakhurst Dairy cares.