Thanks to both cowards for the info!
Thanks to both cowards for the info!
I don't know Ms. Pao, besides what I read on her wikipedia article. Nor do I agree with her actions regarding Y Combinator, even though I can't stand Trump and can see her perspective. Anyway:
1) Where are you getting the sexual harrassment thing from? I do see a mention of a gender harrassment lawsuit in her bio.
2) What you said sounds logical at first blush, but if you have sex with somebody, and they later make unwanted sexual advances to you (after it's made clear you're not interested anymore) then that is still sexual harassment is it not?
In short, please clarify? What you're saying doesn't seem accurate.
To be honest, no, I'm not. But he was pretty open with me about his situation, and I have seen him with weed, and not seen him with other drugs. I also researched it, and from what he described of his use and his symptoms, I had no reason not to believe him. Apparently it's possible to have a bad withdrawal if you're hard-core enough about it.
I don't know, man. I had a jobless friend who convinced himself it was better to buy a little more weed and avoid going through withdrawal symptoms (he was a *really* heavy smoker) than to save his money for car insurance. He only stopped smoking because he ran out of money. He was about to the point of selling his truck for cash. I helped him out with his bills and food, as we both agreed if he didn't have a working vehicle things would have got much worse for him.
That said, (and here's my point) I don't think you can expect "them" to make rational decisions $5 at a time. I think their general perspective, in their low moments, is "I'm screwed no matter what I do, so I might as well enjoy a little of it". Frankly, when I don't know somebody, and my sole interaction with them is going to be "do I hand this person money or not" I don't usually feel like I'm helping them whether I give or don't.
Java isn't supposed to be able to get out of its sandbox without permission, yet it's the source of many vulnerabilities. Why would we trust Rust to be any safer?
My guess is that running untrusted Java code in a trusted Java sandbox has a much larger attack surface than playing untrusted media in a (more or less) trusted Rust app.
The Rust code should still be an improvement, safety-wise, over the current C/C++ solution.
That does not mean the Rust solution will be perfect, and it *definitely* doesn't mean you should download and run untrusted Rust apps!
The GP is referring to the impeachment of Andrew Johnson.
Your assumption, that Office 2016 and Skype For Business are unrelated, is incorrect.
The GP is likely referring to how Skype For Business 2016 is bundled with the Professional Plus edition of Office 2016.
IOW, (s)he meant "update to the latest Skype For Business". So, most likely not shilling.
watts per gram ? Since when is that a measurement standard?
It isn't, yet. But, I first heard of "performance per watt" when Transmeta debuted their first CPU, and similarly thought "who (expletive) cares about that"? Today, performance per watt actually matters in some applications (parallel systems, possibly data centers
Point is, somebody may find a compelling use for these devices if they can be made practical, be they solar-powered robo-flies or whatever.
That defer keyword looks like the mother of all hidden bugs.
At first glance it looks to me like Apple ripped defer straight from Go. I think it has its use -- in a language that doesn't support RAII. But I prefer the latter.
I agree, if we change "about ten years" to "at *least* ten years". Tongue only slightly in cheek. C++ took 25 years (C++11) to become, IMO, a compelling improvement over C.
I disagree with basically everything the coward said -- particularly wrt the Rust community which I think is great -- but I don't use Rust (yet), either. The things that irk me the most about Rust are the lifetime annotations, the fact that it's non-trivial to write a linked-list implementation, and a few issues that will go away after further development (overly restrictive borrow checker and compiler speed). The place it would come in most useful -- working in a corporate-ish environment with morons who don't understand ownership issues and who need a compiler to slap sense into them -- is also the place it is currently (due to novelty, immaturity, and inertia) the least adopted.
But, if Rust can get over some of its present hurdles, it has the potential to become a really good language. And, many would say it already is one today.
What makes you think elemental lithium is any safer than elemental sodium? Pro-tip: it isn't.
That depends on how you're measuring "safer". For example, sodium is more reactive than lithium in water.
With respect, IMO, you have to give the people running the company the strongest disincentive to cheat. What's more of a disincentive for an executive?
a) Company hit with tremendous fines; executives negotiate a severance.
b) Executives prosecuted, and do time in federal. Company hit with (relatively) moderate fines.
If you wanna kill the snake...
Not disagreeing with you, but a nullptr-to-reference cast would at least crash immediately (unless you have a compiler that takes "undefined behavior" too literally). Here's another contrived example:
const char *c = std::string("oops").c_str();
I'm not a c++ expert but I'm pretty sure 'c' now points to freed memory. The real problem is that the code will usually work until a customer runs it. And solutions like valgrind aren't always optimal (consider code coverage and execution speed) or even necessarily available, depending on your platform.
Rust eliminates this class of errors (and several others) entirely, unless you are abusing 'unsafe' (which you can at least grep for in your code) as you mentioned.
I would like Rust to succeed. In several ways, it is basically a 'better' C++ without the C baggage that a lot of people seem to want, and it is clear that Rust's developers have put a lot of thought into it. Still, the language has its warts and oddities. My biggest concern is that support for implementing intrusive data structures (you can Google that, but the Linux kernel's double-linked lists is an example) seemed to be possible, but not Easy, and I think it should be. I also haven't wrapped my head around Rust's lifetimes yet, but it looks clunky. Other things (slow compiler, incomplete library support) should get better with time.
I wish the Rust guys the best of luck, and look forward to using it.
As a data point of one, I'm still running with the 4GB of OCZ ram I bought from newegg (I think) in 2009 and have had no problems. The reviews on that product were also decent.
After reading reviews of their SSD drives, though, I'd avoid those.
I guess the message here (if any) is, pay attention to the reviews on the product. If people say it's crap, it probably is.
Save yourself! Reboot in 5 seconds!