I very much prefer smaller mass market paperback books over the larger trade paperback format that everything is printed on these days. For older books, I go out of my way to find used copies printed in the 90â(TM)s or earlier rather than recent printings since they are so much more compact. Would love to be able buy new books in that size more often.
Not exactly...
It's more like the manufacturer notes that no unnecessary replacement parts have been added to the car in 2 years, and shuts the entire car down demanding extortion money to re-enable it.
In addition, and contrary to the summary, at the start of the pandemic they decided to start "lending out" unlimited copies, beyond the number of books they had actually purchased. That is what triggered the lawsuit, and I really don't see how they are going to justify that as being legal. I only hope that stupid stunt doesn't destroy all the good things that archive.org has built up over the years.
What class of bugs are talking about? Nothing in modern C and C++ standards do much to prevent memory access bugs, which are still the leading cause of exploitable bugs in all the surveys I've seen. Improved tooling like AddressSanitizer have greatly decreased the number of memory access bugs in my C/C++ code from getting to production, but some still do in my code, and in other large C/C++ code bases that I know are using best practices.
Rust eliminates those entirely, except in unsafe blocks which I rarely need, and can more carefully scrutinize and test when needed.
Rust doesn't do as much to avoid integer over/underflow bugs which are the next biggest class of bugs.
> Let me know when Rust has an ISO standard so multiple vendors can make compliant compilers.
Irrelevant for the kernel given how many GCC-specific features they are dependent on. The main reason that you can now compile the kernel with clang is because clang support for those extensions has improved.
> Let me know when a Rust "Hello, world" is under a megabyte
Easy, pass the flags to dynamically link the standard library (like C does by default), and strip symbols, and hello world is ~16K. That is pretty much the same size as GCC produces for a C version of hello world after you strip the symbols.
> It doesn't solve any problems, it just pushes awareness to the coding phase.
Eliminating bugs in development instead of integration or worse production is a solution to my problems.
This has plunged rapidly from amusing to tragic.
Another victim of America's appalling lack of basic mental health care.
Wikipedia isn't exactly a uninvolved party here. An organization's choice about what forms of payment it takes is entirely it's prerogative.
SpaceX chose methane as the fuel for Starship in part because it can be synthesized from carbon-dioxide, water and solar panels. They pretty much have to do this to fuel any return trips from Mars, and plan on maturing the technology by using it to produce fuel for their terrestrial launches.
Here is a confirmation tweet. There are many more detailed articles if you search for them.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/s...
Propellants have to handled on earth before the can be used in space. Many of the current hypergolic propellants are quite nasty and deadly.
In addition, any greenhouse gases created during the production of propellants is released in the earth's atmosphere. Currently that is a negligable drop in the bucket, but if we were to scale up space access to the levels that Space X and Impulse would like to see, then it will become non-negligible. So it is good if the technologies that create economics of scale, are not environmentally detrimental at scale.
But with this announcement I'm going to have to throw my weight behind the team pushing to cancel the change.
Salesforce being incompetent or unaccountable enough to declare their move to Digital Tulips, tax evasion and outright fraud? Don't want our BCI & PII stores attached to that mindset.
I subscribe to the maybe top 10 sites I visit, but there is a huge long tail of useful sites that I visit infrequently or even just once that need some way to pay for their expenses, and three decades into the www, we still have no good way to do so.
There is no good micropayment system. All the options have high payment processing overhead, and poor privacy - either requiring me to share strong identity information directly with the site I'm paying, or letting some third party have information about every site I support (or worse every site I browse), or both. And the cryptocurrency folks have priorities and values that so far have been incompatible with making a system that is actually useful as currency.
Simply banning all tracking and targeted advertising, and going back to passive advertising targeted to the site's demographics, not a specific person, would work just fine for large sites. NYT did it and fared well - but NYT readers are themselves a valuable demographic worth targeting. Some random blog not so much - they would almost certainly see their ad revenue plummet in such a scenario.
I'm in favor of pretty strict privacy legislation, actively take technical measures to protect my privacy in the meanwhile, and will continue to support those actions even if they have negative consequences to the sites I visit. But what I really want is to have some way to support sites that doesn't violate my privacy. This proposal is less bad than the alternatives.
More thoughts. On (3) I'd be okay with a compromise approach where the browser *suggests* categories based on my browsing habits, and I can approve or disapprove.
5) I must be allowed to use plugins to selectively choose whether to expose this API to websites on a case-by-case basis. Even if Google and other legitimate site were to refrain from tracking in lieu of using this API, there will be other malicious sites that just use it to add more bits to the fingerprinting they are already doing.
Yeah, I'm not opposed to advertising, or even targeted advertising, just all the invasive surveillance that surrounds it. I might be persuaded to use something like this, on a few conditions:
1) It should be opt-in not opt-out.
2) I must be able to trust that any advertising domains that participate in this program don't do any other sort of tracking. I shouldn't have to exempt Google's top-level domains in order to participate in this program, like I currently have to do to allow captcha's to work. Otherwise I will not exempt them from my ad/tracking blocker.
3) I should be able to disable the automated learning, and select my own categories of interest. I don't like the system tracking me, regardless of whether my browser is doing it or the websites are. I don't want to have to think about needing to switch to private browser mode anytime I browse somewhere I don't want this system to be learning.
4) The API must be open, and available to any website I browse to use, not just Google's advertising network.
I haven't looked into whether 3 and 4 are already true or not. I don't know what would convince me on point 2, short of privacy laws that give teeth to the program. Eg start with this program being voluntary, then make the current forms of tracking/surveillance illegal so that systems like this are the only legal option.
Not to mention no dedicated hardware LED to indicate that the microphone/camera sensors have been switched by software into an active state. I generally keep my phone inside it's leather sheath and not in the same room. Close enough to reach in a few steps if it beeps, not close enough for rogue candid camera.
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
