It would seem that adopting Rust, which is supposed to be safe by design, would relieve developers of the duty to write safe code. After all, its Rust. None of these nasty null pointers and buffer oveflows are possible. Just like Python relieves developers from the duty of formatting readable code.

Developers should now be freed to make higher level, more difficult to find logic erors.

Thank goodness we made those leaps in microprocessor design and software back in the 1980s. So there's no need for further incremental improvements.

Typed on my $2500 IBM PC, with 640K of memory. Using MSDOS.

Sitting in a cafe in the city of Mykolaiv right now, everything runs on generators. Earlier today, around 7:45 local time a few shahed drones flew over the city, this was after a lqrge attack from about 6 hours prior. Multiple energy distribution systems were hit in multiple regions. There were people killed, some drones hit homes, there were myltiple kinjal (dagger) missiles launched from mig-31 platforms. I crossed the border to Ukraine over 2 weeks ago, spent a week in Kiev, a day in Lviv, a day in Odessa, etc. Everywhere there are issues with energy distribution. Where I am now there are issues with watwr as well of course. People keep going because tbat is what people do, nobody here wants to give up anything to ruzzia, they want to stop the war in a way that prevents future attacs from the scourge that is ruzzia. As to this lawsuit, it is completely justified but it is not enough. Europe is giving ruzzia more money every year in oil and purchases than Europe spends on this war, given tbat Ukraine is protecting Europe from putin taking this war further west, I find this behaviour atrocious.

... is going. I read that as Phoebe Cates.

My guess: It's a scam, built on pre-existing 'bot technology.

When it's all done with, the "investors" will have a huge tax write off for their losses plus some neat new data centers, high end servers and utility resources to go into Bitcoin mining big time.

In related news, Netflix turns a failed $11 million investment into a $55 million tax loss.

Bialystock and Bloom have nothing on Netflix.

You bought The Bible?

Then who remains to buy iCrap?

Yes. And no.

Free apps will continue. As long as they are actually free. Anything that owes (owed?) Apple that 27% of in-app sales or other revenue sources is either not free. Or written by a very generous developer. Apple gots ta' get paid.

What do you think the current 27% fee is? Maybe replaced with a fee for Apple Store server space and installation bandwidth. That's what the now defunct Apple Tax supposedly covered. But the in-app sales revenue stream doesn't necessarily run through Apple systems. And presents no cost to them.

Time to stop coddling US industries with tax write-offs for phony R&D investments and generous depreciation allowances for capital investments. Either get to work actually innovating and building stuff. Or go out of business.

Probably true.

I'm using my converter to "rescue" older displays. Which don't do the full spec performance. So down conversion isn't an evil I must put up with. It's a necesity. I suspect many converters are on the market for exactly this reason.

The whole bugaboo over display performance and human visual accuity is best left for a flame war in another thread. But suffice it to say, the HDMI Forum and Blue Ray Disc Association are wasting a lot of energy over the insoluble issue of content piracy. The market for illicit movie copies, which is well satisfied with garbage filmed in movie theaters by people with cell phones, intersected with the set of people who insist on pristine 4K HD copies is pretty much the null set.

It's like Prohibition. Many people will be satisfied with the booze distilled in automobile radiators. Even if they do go blind. Crap movie copies will always be with us.

It's the sound of Trump's autopen generating another crypto-bro's pardon.

I don't know what part of "bothsides!!" you find as being valid when both sides are not acting equally.

One "side" is very much advancing the agenda of transparency and release. One is not.

That makes them very much unequal, which invalidates your theory.

You are making a very false assumption that motivations and policy never change over time. That's an equally ridiculous foundation to base an argument on. Things change, and policy changes to reflect those changed things, and it happens all the damn time.

Which is all well and good if you're talking about something you can easily replace.

Do realize that when someone spends $130M on a passenger jet, they expect to get a couple decades service out of it, and they aren't going to be ripping out the electronics every other year to upgrade like it's a PC - they upgrade things when they will either get more service revenue out of it (i.e. there's an RoI to be had), or if it's required on an airworthiness directive for safety.

Some of these systems were created before ECC was a thing. And more of them are using industrial components that are designed to work within a very specific range of operating conditions (temperature and power consumption being incredibly important) that even today may not be able to accept ECC RAM - for example, do you know of an off-the-shelf ARM64 CPU that can run inside of 15W and supports ECC? Neither does anyone else. Yet there are companies that are making avionics hardware that is not part of critical safety systems that run on ARM64 because of the power / heat dissipation problems.

It's a very difficult problem space without getting inordinately expensive due to having to make custom hardware at every single turn.

You do know that every single person doesn't have to be in the target demographic for a product, yeah?

If a small car doesn't offer you the needed features, DON'T BUY ONE.

That doesn't mean that it isn't a perfectly viable product for literally millions of other people with different conditions and constraints from yourself.