Why would you do that? If you're using it for non-strings, you'd never have used strncpy, you'd have used memcpy. Which is the same thing without the null termination rules of strncpy. You'd never use the str versions unless actually working on strings.

What BS: just be born as rich as Musk and with a little work you too can be just like him!

I've heard a lot of people say good stuff about the RayNeo Air 4 Pro AR Glasses ... which cost a fraction of this: $300.

I understand that these have more "bells and whistles" ... but if you ignore those bells and whistles, I'm very curious how the core experience (comfort, readable screen, battery, etc.) compares between these two.

In short, I suspect the $300 glasses that focus on just being a monitor will be a better overall experience than this $2+k monstrosity because of all those bells and whistles ... but I'm curious to hear if that's true.

TFA says nothing whatsoever about that. What it says is:

So again, nothing about not posting cop abuse videos. If you have some other information beyond the article, share it ... but otherwise, why are you wasting your life spreading FUD, over something you clearly know nothing about?

AI output is not deterministic, nor is it 100% predictable ... but it absolutely is predictable, to a point.

You can give an LLM the same context and prompt, and (at least nine times out of ten) it will give you basically the same answer. Again, that's not deterministic, and the exact answer may vary ... but if you don't see (a lot of) predictability in your AI's output, you're not using a major/popular model.

"No such thing as bad press."

I use Claude Code on a daily basis. I don't care if Mythos makes it 150% smarter (and all indications are that it will be a much more incremental improvement): THIS AI IS NOT BECOMING TERMINATOR!

Claude is a great, powerful tool. It is also *miles* away from being good enough to build a complete, maintainable, bug-free application of significant size ... let alone from being to recreate even a poor version of itself.

Eh, they were the only frontier AI company to tell the US government "we won't let you use our models to mass surveil US citizens, or mass murder non-citizens" ... even at the cost of literally millions, if not billions of dollars in sales (they lost access to any US government customer).

I won't claim the're the perfect company, but the other (purely profit-driven) AI companies have demonstrated they will do both of those things. You have to give Anthropic some credit ... although it does raise the possibility that, post-IPO, they might become the same as those other companies.

That might be why a feature exists, or maybe even why a particular paid library was chosen instead of another. That doesn't explain why the code is written the way it was, which is the point of documentation. Why the feature exists is the realm of the PRD, not the design doc.

If you haven't read The CIA's Greatest Hits (https://www.amazon.com/CIAs-Greatest-Hits-Real-Story/dp/1593764391), I can't recommend it enough. It's a very small/short book, written by a political cartoonist (so it's half-illustrations, and a really easy read) ... but it will teach you A TON about the history of what the CIA actually does.

Once you've read it, the fact that the CIA is giving its agents the ability to access millions of dollars in gold bars will not surprise you in the slightest.

You are clearly not very aware of reality.

There are liberal Jews, and there are conservative Jews. In fact, in Judaism there are even (literal) religious branches called "reformed", "conservative", and "orthodox".

As you might expect, the "reformed" Jews tend to be liberal, but many aren't. Meanwhile, the "conservative' ones include some of the most batshit crazy right-wing political operatives you can find!

(The "orthodox" ones, in general, are too busy hanging strings and doing other silly stuff from 2000 years ago to be really active in politics).

Of course if those aren't securities, then the entire site is illegal as it's operating as a securities exchange. That's their legal argument for why they aren't gambling sites, and shouldn't be regulated by state gaming commissions. So expect the full might of all those prediction market sites to be lining up against that argument and for finding him guilty.

I am sick of these socialists and their damn unions, trying to ... um ... make my news more accurate! Those fricking commies!

Someone rapes your mother, and the police know who it was (and thus his license), but they don't know where he is.

Are you seriously going to argue "it doesn't matter if we could catch your mother's rapist using new technology"?

Look, I'm no fan of mass surveillance, but "Were the police unable to do their jobs before the Internet?" seems like a mind-numbingly stupid way to think about it.

Crimes go unsolved every day! Serious crimes, like rape, child abuse, torture, or murder. And with crimes like that, you don't want the perpetrator running around free and able to continue committing crimes!

So yes, people have a very good reason to want to make the police more successful, and no that is not a bad thing! It still doesn't make mass surveillance the right answer ... but please, lets not turn our brains off, and ignore the real and serious issues people are (misguidedly) trying to solve here.