having the world's worst criminal state as your greatest ally
I take your point, but I have to ask "Which state is which"? If forced to choose between Israel and America for the title of worst criminal state, I'd have to flip a coin.
There are a lot of problems with both, but neither deserves the title of worst criminal state. Most hypocritical state, maybe.
android 16 is expected to start flagging rogue cell phone towers.
It does. I got a notification in early 2025 (running a pre-release Android 16 build) while traveling in NY. I got someone who was working on the feature to pull the detailed logs from my phone and they were able to get quite a bit of detail about what kind of fake tower it was. Pretty cool.
Is it possible to put software on a phone that prevents it from being tracked this way? Sort of like randomized MAC addresses with WiFi.
Not if you want to have mobile phone/data service.
If your mobile provider supports VOIP and you have Wifi available (e.g. at home) you can just disable cellular service. Then everything will go through your Internet connection -- and everything is encrypted these days. But that only works when you have Wifi.
I care about my heroin. I buy good quality China white and I inject two moderate doses each morning. I may have a third in the afternoon on occasion. It is a baseline "quality of life" staple for me - a ritual that pleases me greatly.
I will not give it up if I'm told it's unhealthy, and I won't ramp up my intake if I'm told it's medicine.
It's pure pleasure. So I don't give a damn what your studies say. I'm not interested. I will consume it as I see fit, and health informs exactly none of the decision.
(I'm not claiming any equivalence between coffee and heroin, but the "I enjoy it so I don't care about health effects" claim really only works if the health effects are fairly minor.)
Ok so when I develop an application in Python or c++ I use Qt. Is there something comparable to Qt in rust?
You can use Qt from Rust.
I have fun programming in Rust... I like building type systems that prevent errors and automate drudgery. Both C++ and Rust let me do that, C does not...you spend a fair amount of time thinking about low-level details of what the compiler is generating. That's true, and I like thinking about memory layouts, cache lines, what the optimizer is going to do
You very convincingly make it sound so fun.
My point is that if that low-level stuff is what makes C fun to you, then Rust and C++ will be fun, too... but without all of the drudgery and error-prone crap C makes you do.
If that's not what makes C fun to you, then what is? It's certainly not being able to accomplish a lot quickly; higher-level languages are much better for that.
If all the "problems" are stupid little things then why not just have AI clean it up? Insist that developers use AI defensively rather than tying their hands with a language that limits them.
I have to push back against your assumption that Rust is a language that limits developers. It absolutely does not. As for the AI bit... I use AI to write code all day. It's great, but it makes the same sort of mistakes humans do. I find Rust is a great language for AI to write (under appropriate supervision).
If you have fun programming in Rust, you will have fun programming in C.
I have fun programming in Rust. I don't like programming in C. I do like programming in C++. I like building type systems that prevent errors and automate drudgery. Both C++ and Rust let me do that, C does not.
I think the point of your "you will have fun programming in C" is that in both languages (and C++) you spend a fair amount of time thinking about low-level details of what the compiler is generating. That's true, and I like thinking about memory layouts, cache lines, what the optimizer is going to do, etc. But I don't like all of the tedium C forces on me.
On balance, I prefer Rust over every other language I've used.
I have a repo in a sandbox with no remote. Claude is quite good at pushing commits to this repo during its own milestones during development, and it will use it to hunt down bugs when tests fail after a commit, stepping back to a commit before this session's work to see if this is a new bug , or a new way to expose an existing bug. If it sees that it is a new way to exercise an existing bug, it will binary search its way through the commits until it narrows down what changed, and then looks at how to fix it.
My overall strategy is very different. I don't think Claude's code is remotely good enough yet, so I don't trust it to go off and do "development" semi-unsupervised. I direct and review everything it writes, and I control the scope and content of every commit. To be a little more precise, Claude's code is generally fine (if a bit over-commented), but Claude rarely produces code structure that is clear, clean and correctly-mapped to the problem domain, to my (very picky) eyes. So I never just turn it loose on a large, multi-commit development task.
It does feel like we're in a simulation doesn't it? Only a corporation running a simulation can fuck things up as much as they are today.
Entropy is the default state; order and good outcomes are unnatural and require significant energy and focus to impose.
"I wonder if" - now that was an honest mistake.
Are you sure you're not an LLM?
The fact that LLMs are tripping over themselves trying to be "Honest"
I think this is the result of their trainers trying to reduce hallucination. And hallucination *has* been reduced, so it's probably been largely successful, but it has produced this era of versions that are concerned about honesty, that claims of honesty or apologies for lack or honesty, are pervasive in their output.
But this is basic, basic, basic stuff. It's been committing things to git ever since it was built, and yet, it keeps tripping over itself.
My iron rule is that Claude is not allowed to modify git state, not even to stage or unstage, and definitely not to commit. As long as that rule is followed, any mistakes can be cleaned up easily.
Paying attention to stick shifts is something done by people who only very rarely drive them. For people who drive stick shifts daily they don't think about them at all, it's just a natural reaction.
And even people who don't drive stick regularly (but know how) quickly stop having to pay attention. I haven't owned a stick shift since the mid 90's, but I often get them when renting cars overseas. It takes a day or two of paying attention, and then it just becomes automatic and effortless.
there was no clutch. I just kicked the footwell for no reason.
BTDT when coming home from a trip where I'd been driving a manual for a couple of weeks.
Just about every motorcycle rider has intimate knowledge of manual shifting. If they are included, 60 percent could be about right.
About 3% of registered road vehicles are motorcycles. When you include dirt bikes the number of riders is higher, but it's still very low compared to the number of automobile drivers. I don't think motorcycle riders are likely to shift the overall numbers very much.
I wish it were that simple.
It is.
The problem is that you, the brave and the free of today are like the putin subjects - whining all the time that 'it ain't my job to watch over democracy' - so your politics gets more and more corrupted. And you get fucked.
Deservedly.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, I see.
Successful and fortunate crime is called virtue. - Seneca
