Personally, I'm hoping that we find out that Charon is a mass relay...or at least, made out of cheese.

Nim is just yet another statically-typed GC language with an unsafe escape hatch. I can get the same thing (and much better syntax) with Java and JNI or C# and P/Invoke. Yawn.

Rust, on the other hand, is something genuinely new: it provides completely memory safety without a requiring a garbage collector at all. It's sad to seeing people switch from Rust to Nim: they're often too inexperienced to know what they're giving up, and I feel like they're seeking (syntactic) novelty, not a programming environment that's actually useful.

I agree about investing in good hardware with force feedback, such as a G27 wheel or similar, but thats not even slightly the hard part. The problem is there is pretty much no software that gives even close to a realistic impression of driving an actual car, or how it realyl responds.

Since I'm lucky enough to have owned and/or driven several of the cars that appear in such games, I can tell you first hand that all driving games I've ever tried (including the ones you mentioned and the ones that make bold claims about hyper-realsitc physics) all fail BADLY at feeling or responding anything like the actual cars they are supposed to be moodelling. In fact they most don't behave anything like any actual car would at all. Actually the real cars are FAR easier to drive than their video game versions.

Also you want to teach omeone how to deal with traffic, situational awareness, blind spots, pedestrians etc etc, not how to get good lap times. I think that if you leart to drive only using a video game you would actually have a LOT of bad preconceptions around physics to undo when you first got behind the wheel of a real car, so I'm not sure using racing video games to teach is a beneficial approach at all.

This is also true of PC flight simulators by the way. If real cessna 152s and 172s were half as twitchy and difficult to fly and land as they are in Microsoft Flight sim X and to a lesser degree, X-plane, nobody would have ever bought one at all, yet in real life most flight schools choos those planes for training exactly because of their easy handling and docility.

 

>> Are you referring to Hybrid in the sense of electric motors and batteries that are charged by regenerative braking? That's something I don't have any experience with but I'm not aware of any downside to them.

Extra weight, complexity, extra cost to buy and maintain.

WPA is TKIP. It's a way of making the network more secure than WEP without requiring major hardware upgrades (uses the same RC4 cipher as WEP). WPA2 introduces AES encryption. IIRC there are known vulnerabilities that allow an attacker to inject packets into a WPA connection.

The clean C++ way to deal with that is to use RAII and have little helper objects that are there just for their destructors. It lets you return from any point in a function (or exit via an exception) and still have all your cleanup done. Of course it obfuscates flow even more than goto.

Of course I have. Call me strange if yuou want but I actually LIKE driving, especially on long open roads you find on roadtrips.

I like the idea of a TJ or a wrangler, but its surprising how expensive even old/very high mileage ones are.
Also AC and a somewhat airtight cabin are both pretty much must-haves here in Phoenix in the summer.

I once had asparagus.

I have EXACTLY the same issue with cars.

I really don't want (to buy, maintain, or the extra weight, complexity and/or immediate outdatedness of) LCD touchscreens, navigation, parking aids, multimedia systems, blind spot monitors, voice control, OnStar, 57 airbags, hybrid technology, my car connecting to its manufacturer, etc etc.
These "features" are pretty much all literally unavoidable in all cars these days.

I ESPECIALLY don't EVER want a car that drives itself.

I wish someone would just make a new version what used to pass for a sporty car about 20-30 years ago. I.e.a simple, ergonomic cabin that uses physical controls, analog dials, a good motor and a well-sorted suspension, all without the need for any onboard computers at all. I say this as a software engineer, even I know there are some places that are better off without any technology and computers, and the car is one of the best examples I can think of.

>> You can't win if you don't play

In practical terms, the chances of winning are about the same whether you do or don't buy a ticket.

But who's prepared to pay more (even just in terms of ad impressions) just so they can see their cat pictures? No-one's arguing that security isn't essential for your bank or whatever, but all this "free" shit actually costs money to deliver, and encryption would make it cost more.

It is if you have constraints on server resources. Encryption costs CPU time, and it requires even more if you use forward security as people tend to since the Snowden revelations. If you're serving lots of public assets (think 4chan image CDN), requiring encryption would greatly increase the CPU resources you need.

Not really, it has a number of modifications, including dropping mandatory encryption.

Because private schools are PRIVATE. You don't have to send your kids there.