Ok, that's fair. It is still possible to code sloppily. However, forcing the user to think about object lifetimes does, in my opinion, lead to more sound designs.

It will help it succeed in the goal of having fewer memory-based CVEs.

It inhibits sloppy coding, but certainly not creative coding. It just requires some proof that you're not committing some programming sins. AI-produced code never gets reviewed adequately (you can't convince me that these people bragging about 50,000 lines a day are reviewing it all), but at least rust's compiler gives me some confidence in one class of bugs in its code (as long as you build your vibe-slop with `-Dunsafe-code`)

I have trouble taking programming advice from AI advocates, who clearly don't like programming and also don't take pride in the code they produce.

When i think "Space-age", i think 1960-1990. I think we need a new term that means "modern and futuristic"

If you expect the average person to constantly convert between two clocks, when many people struggle to make it to work on time under normal circumstances, then you must surround yourself with uncommonly competent people. I'm jealous!

"Sleep Experts" are just trying to sell fancy mattresses.

I have thought of this as well, but it would be really awkward in any part of the world where the date would change in the middle of the day. For instance, the date would change in mid-morning in Tokyo and at dinner time in Los Angeles. I can't imagine people getting used to that.

So i would have to embroider "make america great again" on my own hat? why not just buy a hat that's *complete*, instead of some half-finished proto-hat?

(this is a joke, but one that i find funny enough to burn some karma on...)

Because they're fun and simple. Sometimes i want to turn my brain off and play a game, and not be immersed in a hyper-realistic world.

An AI once bit my sister

Sure, and then AI to fix all of the AI generated bugs. And AI to fix those bugs. And AI to fix those bugs.....

Who's paying for all of these tokens?

Fine, i'll feed the troll

Sure, that's why Britian won the revolutionary war.

You're not giving them money because they can decrypt your data. You're giving them money because they *say* they can decrypt your data. By the time you find out your data's gone, so is your money.

I'm not saying there's no danger, i'm saying that making these vulnerabilities easier to discover does not make them more dangerous, because they are just as easy to discover by people who want to fix them. If they were *all* known to *all* bad actors, then they would *all* be known to good actors as well, and would presumably be addressed.

If *some* of them are known to *one* bad actor, but not to *any* good actors, that is a *much* more dangerous situation.

Making bugs easier to discover is not a bad thing.