No, strange glitch on my end... I swear your original post used "sill working" and I couldn't for the life of me figure out what you meant. No trace of that now so I can't explain where that came from!

Considering Fedora on an LTS server is an interesting choice, to say the least.

While I think replacing coreutils with uutils is pointless and a waste of precious resources, I don't think it would influence my choice of server distros. Especially if it's 99% compatible I doubt you'd ever know if you hadn't read this slashdot article.

No I don't believe it ever did. The POSIX standard defined the behavior of > to truncate immediately decades ago, for particular reasons including proper error handling. I can find no evidence it was ever like that before on Linux. Maybe you used a shell that was not POSIX compatible.

And besides all that, it has nothing to do with coreutils or their rust equivalent. It's a shell-enforced thing.

This isn't even a terrible idea either, it's probably workable but there is a negative percent change this admin could get it done or even get out of the idea phase.

The costs of nuclear are addressed all the time.

The problem is the nuke fanbois either ignore the costs or hand-wave them away: "Nuclear is only expensive because of protests and regulations. Next time will be different. Blah, blah, blah."

Even without considering the costs of waste and accidents, nuclear costs four times as much as wind or solar and has a 20-year lead time.

Tens of thousands of barrels of toxic waste were dumped near Catalina Island, but the vast majority are non-radioactive chemical waste.

DDT leaking from the barrels is a much bigger problem than nuclear waste and shows up in the local sea lion population.

Anyway, there's nothing realistic that we can do about it since any attempt to retrieve the barrels will likely make things worse.

Certainly AI is a powerful tool for the CCP to continue to control what people think and how they think. This is no doubt why the CCP is encouraging an increase in AI development under their control. It's a seductively powerful tool. For the good of the people of course. Honestly makes me wonder if some of Trump's inner circle are thinking the same thing, although their actions in the Trump Iran war suggest they might not.

Timothy Zahn wrote some very thought-provoking and disturbing words about this years ago (despite the em dashes it is not AI-generated!):

"What sort of power?"

For the first time since landing, Thrawn seemed taken aback. "The conquering of worlds, of course. The final defeat of the Rebellion. The reestablishment of the glory that was once the Empire's New Order."

C'baoth shook his head. "You don't understand power, Grand Admiral Thrawn. Conquering worlds you'll never even visit again isn't power. Neither is destroying ships and people and rebellions you haven't looked at face-to-face." He waved his hands in a sweeping gesture around him, his eyes glittering with an eerie fire. "This, Grand Admiral Thrawn, is power. This city---this planet---these people. Every human, Psa-dan, and Myneyrsh who live here are mine. Mine."

And then later:

"I told him at the very beginning that true power didn't lie in the conquering of distant worlds. Or in battles and war and the crushing of faceless rebellions."

He smiled, his eyes glittering brightly in Covell's mind. "No, General Covell," he said softly. "This---this---is true power. Holding another's life in the palm of your hand. Having the power to choose his path, and his thoughts, and his feelings. To rule his life, and decree his death."

If things were to otherwise stay the same, then it would. They won't. Some descendant of "vibe coding" will become the dominant mode within 20 years. Probably a *lot* sooner. Next year wouldn't really surprise me.

Also, Rust is more complex to use than C, so a small program is much better in C. And a large program is probably better in either C++ or Python(with a lot of library calls).

I don't like Rust, so I'm probably not being fair to it, but I struggle to identify a good use case. (Personally, I'd rather use Forth than Rust.)

Note however "will be", not "is". It's not there yet.
Then you have the problem of getting the right standards.
Then you have the problem of getting the right specs.
Then you have the problem of getting the right problem. ...
There's probably an end to this somewhere, but I doubt that it will be in perfection.

Nobody can write safe code. People, can, however, test the code they write, and if there is a comprehensive test suite, fix it so that it works safely. Debugging is mandatory!

Unfortunately auto correct sabotaged your original post. Until this post I was wondering what you meant by "sill working."

If you are hiring a developer your chances of finding one who is not incompetent is vanishingly small. The correct approach is to train them to be competent, and set standards. This should begin with requiring the bug tracker to be emptied out (or decreasing bug count, if the total number is currently overwhelmingly large), and there are plenty of online and in-person resources for training developers to learn how to write secure code.

Security vulnerabilities happen in every language. Anyone who thinks the language will make them safe is an idiot. What I mean is, you are an idiot, cmseagle 1195671.

The problem as I see it is coming up with good standards. We do have standards in some places, for example, SOX requires changing passwords every three months as best practices. But that is probably not actually best practice, so the wrong thing was codified.

How do we get the right things codified is the question.

My take was that he could have stopped it if he wanted to, but the bureaucratic machine was already in motion, and he would have had to put some effort into stopping it. I'm glad we didn't bomb Kyoto but maybe Xi will.