Besides 'bodies', NK has weapons to provide. It may not be of higher quality than Russian weapons and ammo are, but it helps to fill the gaps - at least a little bit.

Given that Youtube consumes about 6 times more electricity, should we ban that as well? Should we also prohibit use of escalators for buildings that have at least 1 elevator? Also, what about third world countries like El Salvador who see an opportunity to democratize money instead of relying on a third-party (the USA) that is printing its money like crazy and only compensates its own citizens for that?

I don't know specifically, but oftentimes an open source project needs to procure some sort of compute capacity to run integration tests, maybe a sponsor deal, etc. Once you have a legal entity with people actually authorized to sign on behalf of said entity, it becomes less hassle to figure out who can sign things.

> No? Then you don't want UBI, because lazy, dumb or crazy people will blow their UBI on booze and bling, and then be destitute. So you will wind up with UBI *and* all of the old programs. Can you support that statement with science? Of course there will always be outliers, but from what I've seen what you suggest is not likely to happen in the bulk of cases [1]. When people are poor and have no secure/stable income, they tend to make bad decisions [2], mostly focused on the immediate short-term (and get rich quick schemes like lotteries). However, once that lack of stability is taken away, people make better decisions aimed at the longer term. Also, it's a _basic_ income. If you have a decent job, you ought to make more than with just basic income. As a result people are still motivated to go out and work. But maybe also eat healthier, and work out more. All in all that would be a win for sorciety.

Now I don't know if there's enough science to go all-in with UBI, but not persuing it at all because of a few 'rotten apples' is also a little naive - I think.

1. https://www.newscientist.com/a...
2. https://thecorrespondent.com/2...

How does this relate to the third-party doctrine in the USA? If you have a confidential conversation with your lawyer, but you also allowed Amazon to listen in on that conversation. Is it then still confidential?

Though it maybe not perfect, it's near-impossible to do a blind study when it comes to food. After all, people do see/taste/experience the stuff they eat.

Personally, I think it's not too far fetched. We know that the microbiome in your stomach has got all sorts of effects on the rest of the body, with more processes like these being discovered every day. This research could be a cause to investigate further, and see if - for example - we can extract what (strain/family of) gut bacteria is exactly responsible for this process.

You make a good point. Gotta love statistics :)

The difference between 9.3% chance and 11.5% chance is actually a 24% (11.5/9.3=1.236) difference. I don't know if that's significant, nor do I have an opinion about whether this is causation or correlation. But 24% seems way more significant than 2.2%.

Color me surprised if they didn't pass a copy along to Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. The latter would happily pass it on to their Israeli friends. Way to go!

The European Commission recently did a report on this subject. Their conclusion was basically that although such a levy could in theory work, it would be very complicated to govern and as such easily circumventable (and what big company isn't willing to bend the rules if they're flexible?).

The conclusion from the EC was that it would be much easier to simple start taxing Kerosine. Then you don't have to make any distinction between short and long haul flights, you no longer have to look at what kind of air plane was being used. Just tax the fuel, like all(?) developed nations have been doing for a very long time with cars.

A couple of reasons for me to use Go is that it scales easily (low-cost coroutines), is more or less memory safe (Garbage Collection, no risk of buffer overflows, use after free, etc), performs rather well, and has a standard library that's very well suited for systems programming. So when having to develop something like a web or mail server, Go is an obvious choice for me.

I'm not sure why you refer to 'try catch blocks'. The 'try' keyword as it was proposed is not in any way related to exceptions. Golang does have something that resembles something akin to exceptions, namely panics, from which you can recover() in an upper scope.

In Go, a function can have multiple return arguments, oftentimes the last return argument being an error object. It's a best practice that whenever you invoke a function that can return an error you check if there's an error set, and handle that, e.g.:

A while ago, a survey was published where 6% of respondents said that error handling could/should be improved. This was subsequently interpreted as 'we need a syntax that allows for less lines than currently required. Besides the proposed syntax, that basic premise was discussed as well. Currently, native errors don't have e.g. stack traces etc, the survey didn't differentiate any further, so it's hard to conclude if one or the other should be improved.

Fair enough. But there's not going to be an exact point in time where you can say "see, now we know it's secure".

So I'm willing to applaud them now (when they get the exposure), and simply rant more when it turns out it's buggy as hell and/or totally unfit for production.

Also, I also didn't read tfa, so my response was merely based on the headline. I'm sure you'll understand :)

Rightfully so. C is often admired for its performance, the only downside being that you need to take care of memory management yourself. Also, OpenSSL is probably the most commonly used TLS library out there written by a couple of mathematicians who used every trick in the book to get it to perform in the fastest way possible (security turned out to be less of a concern...). If there's now a new library written in a language touted for its memory safety, which is also faster than the most commonly used library written in C, then I think this achievement is quite admirable.

I'm not a Rust user myself but I'm happy to give credits where they're due.

Why? If anything the Debian package manager is proven technology that has proven itself over the past 20+ years.

That's not a matter of 'hope'. It's a matter of engineering. Incompetent (or less experienced) engineers will always be able to screw up - no matter the package manager.

I do want to run a recent version of vlc, and I do so using plain old Debian packages. Works like a charm.