> Children shouldn't be exposed to the capitalistic system so early. It mechanizes their minds and makes it harder for them to imagine a world apart from exchange when they grow up.

The entire world runs like this, and isn't likely to change any time soon. Additionally I personally don't see an issue with children learning to earn money as they grow up (like they did with the lemonade stand) - I prefer that to having 20 year olds thinking their parents are an endless source of cash.

Kids need to go from zero to ~20 years old and become a full human being in that lapse, and this is just a step towards that.

This is really just malicious reporting.

The truth of the matter has zero to do with the AI going rogue, it's that the person chatting with the chat bot got exactly the responses they requested in their attempt to get social media likes.

How is trying to present this as the company's AI gone rogue not considered to be a malicious representation of truth?

Or this research paper that analyzes comics from an anal perspective (whatever that means): https://ri.conicet.gov.ar/hand...

Seriously though, itâ(TM)s really not about shutting down science but shutting down political funding facades.

> I have a 6 year old MacBook Pro. I can barely tell it apart from the latest models, performance-wise.

You're a Pro and you can't see a performance difference between an i9 MBP and an M1 MBP? It's huge.

But as an alternative just touch both computers and you'll be able to tell by the temperature.

Oh but I do know. I did live those realities you know zilch about.

Again you thiinking as someone who hasnâ(TM)t experienced what Iâ(TM)m describing. Iâ(TM)m not discussing it makes sense Iâ(TM)m explaining it to you because you donâ(TM)t know it.

As I explained to you getting other currencies is regulated, and storing gold or cash at home is very unsafe.

But your first world reality is the only valid one right?

It does not.

Youâ(TM)re just seeing it with the eyes of (privilege) someone who never had to save in a high inflation currency in a country that prohibits buying foreign currencies. If you had lived in such a situation youâ(TM)d know cryptos offer a way out of being killed by inflation.

Thereâ(TM)s a reason why cryptos have been embraced more heavily in countries where the state is more oppressive.

Stop thinking about the value of crypto in the US or Europe and start thinking about itâ(TM)s value in Venezuela, Cuba or Argentina. Then youâ(TM)ll get it.

Swizzling isn't a good feature.
Swift can integrate with C/C++ too.
For the naming, I disagree... Swift is much better in terms of readability.

> ObjectiveC is a MUCH, MUCH better language, but it's very hard to find work making apps in it these days.

As someone who has worked for the last 12 years as a full time iOS developer... ObjC is inmensely inferior to Swift in so many ways, the bigger one probably being the lack of optionals.

Because of optionals alone, pure Swift codebases deal away (almost entirely if it wasn't for IUOs) with what's the number 1 issue in ObjC, which is `nil` object exceptions.

And even if you disregard the technical advantages, the syntax is so much nicer and easier to read (and this is coming from someone who once thought ObjC was great!).

How is ObjC superior to Swift in any way?

The simplest explanation is that cryptos are just going up.

So the question I would ask is not if the hamster has outperformed WB, but if the hamster has outperformed buy & hold crypto investors.

My bet is it hasn't, but I'm too lazy to check.

That's a bit extreme though. This discussion is about what you value in work, not life. You could love travelling on your own, but still only care about money from work.

As an example: I'd really rather travel with my family than do it with my colleagues.

In my life work serves a very specific purpose: sustain myself and my family. For fun, learning, and other things... I prefer to do them on my own, with the people that I chose.

That's fine, but not against what I was saying. Those books can exist without us holding back in our technology. And I'd argue they're still maintained, considering they're being kept in a building that's there for that very purpose. The building is surely not abandoned or kept clean on its own, to name a few things. The same goes for websites actually.

But you're missing the point, I'm not saying those things are bad. I'm saying we shouldn't hold progress back due to them. Books haven't stopped us from creating the web, and they haven't stopped us from creating e-Books.

I see no good reason to have old websites holding back on HTTPS. The argument is a crappy one.

Legacy shouldn't hold us back. That's a sure way to make sure you stop progressing. Old sites not working anymore because they're not really maintained is not a good reason to try and stop progress.

We should instead just make sure we move forward in a way that makes sense from a technological and convenience point of view.

PS: this is pretty obvious while unit-testing but I'll make it clear to avoid any confusion... the real implementation of SSLHashSHA1.update() and SSLHashSHA1.final() would not be called in this unit test, as that'd be outside of the scope of it.