BLAS and Lapack were converted to C years ago.
Less sure about the NAG libraries.

...is that virtually all diagnostics, categorisation, and treatment is based on symptoms that massively overlap between conditions. Indeed, it's very unusual to have one condition because the condition isn't the thing that actually exists.

This will persist until medical practitioners forget symptom-based approaches and look for causes.

Sure, they can't look for causes using 1.5T MRI scanners. Those can't detect anything beyond catastrophic injury. But the scanners authorised for medical diagnosis is 7.3T, the highest used in medicine is 9.1T, and the highest that is safe for use on a living human brain is currently 12T.

Yes, they're expensive and might not differentiate all conditions, but medicine done correctly is about treating the actual problem. We donnit treat the four humours for a reason, even though some of the medicines so derived were effective. Because we learned and because we decided medicine should be evidence-based.

If private healthcare can't do it, that's fine. Government-funded independent healthcare is the correct strategy as governance and finance are expensive. Eliminating the redundancy gives the extra money needed to pay for services.

Neither of these is considered diagnostic for ADHD.

There's a valid argument to adding the SILK parallelism extensions to GCC and Clang, then seeing if these could improve Linux kernel performance.

There's a valid argument for using SEL4's theorem idea and writing theorems for core components, like the memory manager, to establish correctness in sections of code small enough and structurally simple enough for this to be doable.

Rust is currently slower (but not by much) than C, but does offer a few gems to improve robustness. Which, of course, you wouldn't need if you had the theorems, but you can't use theorems to robustify non-deterministic code. So allowing Rust is not necessarily bad, it's just not a direction I'd go for any code segment where formalism offers a wider range of advantages with no additional skills being required.

So I'm OK with Rust, it's merely not the first step I, personally, would have taken. There are, after all, a lot more mathematicians capable of writing theorems than there are Rust kernel programmers capable of writing truly safe Rust code. And Rust really only gives memory safety, the theorems would provide functional safety too.

But throughout history, there have been many good languages, especially ones that had one or two clever features absent from others that made a big difference.

Most of these languages (Eiffel, Nim, Ada, SPARK, Tcl/Tk, LISP, Forth, MUMPS, Oberon, Ruby, Occam, Erlang, Haskell, MARS D, PL/I, etc) had some time in the sun, and a few of these are still very popular in niche fields. But they never took the world by storm. Perl, which DID take the world by storm, suffered from some disastrous politics and over-ambitious updates and has all but been replaced by Python and PHP, where PHP is itself withdrawing to more of a background presence.

All but Occam will survive, sure, but as tiny islands that can't survive in the longer term. Occam is functionally extinct, which is a shame as it had by far the best IPC system and multithreading system of any language.

SILK was an ingenious parralel extension to C, but it exists now only in an extension to Intel's compiler. Nobody else has reimplemented it and it's not in the standard. Is Unified Parallel C still a thing? A lot of other parallel extensions have died - the ATLAS library tried a few and found it made the code slower.

But Fortran (which has implicit parallelism) and COBOL are recovering, and C/C++ are still fighting hard. Java nearly died during the dot com era and Oracle has been sabotaging it ever since, but it might endure despite their best efforts.

Rust might endure and even replace one of the Lovecraftian Great Old Ones. It easily could. It's a strong language with a lot of support. But so did other languages whose stars have faded. It cannot and should not be taken for granted that Rust will join the Ancient Ones and become essentially immortal.

(Python shouldn't assume it either, given what happened to Perl and what is happening to PHP.)

Fortelling the future of programming languages is a dangerous game, and as Galadriel, top geek in Lothlorien, once said, for telling is in vain and all paths may run ill.

Wow, the mental gymnastics to ignore sanctions and security guarantees as part of the geopolitics are astonishing.

This site is going to be in full meltdown mode the day after the election. I wonder if there will be suicides with the way the Mockingbird Media has people wound up.

And, yeah, Trump bitched out on pardoning Assange and Snowdon so nobody thinks he'll pardon Ulbricht either.

In the same way they view God as whatever the latest technology is.

A wheel with a wheel, a clockmaker god, a machinist, a weilder of energy, a programmer, a simulation, and now an AI.

Because saying "I don't know" is the most painful thing for a materialist.

The secret is: I have a goal and am willing to work hard to iterate. The best SciFi authors can do this in their minds - it's amazing.

The researchers don't seem to have satisfied the impetuous author.

He better get to work on solving that next problem and publishing a paper since it's so damn easy.

Odds are good that the 76 Swine Flu, Lyme Disease (and the two comorbid mutant viruses that showed up in Lyme at the same time) and AIDS were lab leaks.

The 1917 Flu seems to have come from a Kansas Army Barracks on a base with a diseases lab but it's too old to be certain.

Polio seems to have been spread through vaccines. Measles we know how to deal with. Smallpox and anthrax are still restricted to labs but we do know the Army did the attack on the Capitol.

It's not our only risk but it eclipses the other risks so it deserves the majority of attention.

Anyway WHO supports making the lab risk higher so they can go straight to hell.

WHO was a malicious peddler of misinformation and tyrannical advice during the covid leak outbreak.

Putting them in charge of the next one would be peak retardation. Why does the author here support "fail up" rewards?

Also retarded is the idea that only one approach should be tried in the next pandemic and that should come from central planners.

Try taking a year-one Information Theory class - Jeeze. They disqualify themselves by suggesting it.

All the denials specifically name iCloud Photos.

What I didn't see at all was an explanation that 17.5 includes automatic database repair or any technical explanation.

Maybe that exists and I missed it or maybe it's a secret update or maybe it's BS.

Until they come clean on the A5 GPU intentional backdoor I'll presume BS to begin with.

Open Source is a floor for being taken seriously on security claims.

It's OK because the idea of a Republic that you have a voice in is only a means of control you fell for.

And I don't blame you for that unless you had based homeschooling parents whom you ignored.

The concern he pointed out was third-party auditing of a fast-moving target.

It's a fair point; perhaps not as concerning as the prior Chairman of the Board of Signal Foundation having /deep/ Intelligence Community ties.

As far as we know Signal is secure but was that yesterday's build or Tuesday's build?

If we're suspicious and a national emergency happens and a new build comes out ... then what.

We should learn from the xz penetration.

> they dropped SMS support, at which point I had to stop using it

Had to?

Did your boss make you?

There are so few situations in which this might be true.

> It makes me think they have a backdoor.

Everything is plaintext on the Telegram server - no backdoors needed.