Re: Reminds me of TV sets
A Sony Bravia then
6404 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2009
Rust is a safer C.
It is nowhere near ready to replace C++, and probably never will be.
That's one of the reasons people get annoyed. The evangelists are conflating totally different languages, one of which Rust simply absolutely cannot replace due to completely missing features such as inheritance.
Composition is often the right answer and there are definitely people who abuse inheritance, but without inheritance there are many things like GUI and plugins that become impossible to write "safely", as the compiler cannot verify memory layout for you.
On the other hand, Rust is often better than C and it is also helping to improve static analysis tools for languages using the LLVM back end, which is good.
You can always use an etheric keel and rudder.
More seriously, to go closer to the Sun you need to slow down the orbit, thrusting along your direction of travel.
In a circular orbit that is exactly perpendicular to the radius. In a highly elliptical orbit that vector can be a little towards or away from the radius, although unless the ellipse is extreme, it's basically perpendicular.
Thrusting radially does not (alone) raise or lower your orbit, it only adjusts the elements by a small amount, as it's by far the least efficient direction.
Of course, if you adjust the elements to interact closely with something else, then that will significantly change the orbit as momentum is exchanged.
I assure you that the scheduling code has been changed quite a lot in Windows, Linux and macOS over the last few years.
There have been some pretty significant published changes recently in both Windows and Linux to better handle higher core counts and support heterogeneous cores - 'Performance' and 'Efficiency'. Going back a little further socket affinity was a rather major change.
macOS changed entire hardware architecture, so they almost certainly tweaked it too.
There is more going in the depths than almost anyone realises.
I don't count Arduino as being an OS, I consider it to be a "bare metal" hardware abstraction layer. One could run an OS on top of the Arduino HAL, though most projects won't need to.
On the other hand, one can certainly argue about when a HAL becomes an OS.
The point is that in the kernel, the vast majority of it is unsafe.
Thus what would actually happen is that some large proportion of it gets rewritten (introducing errors) and wrapped in "unsafe" (gaining nothing).
Thus pushback, as there is great risk for very little proposed benefit.
If you want to prove the language works well for low-level, write firmware for hardware devices.
And if you want the language to be generally adopted, write applications and bindings to popular GUI frameworks.
And if you ever want it to replace C, standardise an ABI.
I'm not sure you can really make that comparison.
Going from nothing to "enough of a working prototype to demo in a friendly controlled environment" is a far smaller task than handling sufficient edge cases to actually be production ready.
I've seen a great many projects that demo brilliantly, then vanish because getting production ready is a lot of work - and it's a lot of detail-oriented, often thankless work.
Rust doesn't have to care because it only does static linking
Wait, really?
This Rust in the kernel project was dead before it started then.
No dynamic linking means there's no possibility of plugins.
Drivers are dynamically loaded plugins. So Rust cannot do driver interfaces.
It also means it cannot ever handle the parts of nontrivial applications that have the highest risk of memory safety related issues.
An increase in DALYs means people diagnosed with the condition are surviving for longer, in better condition.
An increase in incidence means it's being diagnosed more often. That could be more people are getting it, or that people are actually diagnosed and getting treatment instead of simply dropping dead.
Of course, it's Gen AI which means the whole page is utter bollocks with no basis in evidence, just random comments on Reddit.
It takes a really huge amount of delta-v to do what they're doing.
Electric propulsion with its really crazy-high exhaust velocity is basically the only way we can do it at all.
Chemical propellants would have massed so much that it simply wouldn't have been feasible to launch in the first place.
On top of that, I'm not even sure there are chemical propellants that remain sufficiently stable at the temperatures Bepi will reach.
I don't consider trivial to be the same as easy or quick.
A long list of trivial things is still a lot of work, it's just not work that requires rare skills or particularly special knowledge.
"Compile this massive codebase" is often trivial (click one button), but may take several hours to actually complete.
"Fix the errors and warnings after updating the compiler" is often trivial, but may take a long time to do.
And trivial fixes often require a lot of nontrivial work to actually find.
It sounds like the major parts were the lack of GUI, requiring a remote development environment to be set up, and the custom(ish) filesystem.
Everything else appears to have been relatively trivial - at least, far easier than moving from one version of Exchange to another.
We know our best theories are wrong. That's why Physics is still exciting.
We have one set of theories that works extremely well at very small scales and high energies, and another that works extremely well at much longer scales and lower energies. But neither works at both, and they barely overlap.
Nobody knows how "thinking" works.
Anyone claiming otherwise is a charlatan trying to sell you something.
What we do know is that LLMs don't think. They cannot, because every interaction is a one-shot deal.
The Black Box is photocopied, your prompt is fed into the photocopy, a result is provided and the photocopy is destroyed.
It didn't think, because there is no opportunity for self-reflection.
Large price rises make customers look seriously at alternatives.
That's always been the case.
Virtualisation is one of the easiest things to transition, because the actual applications and end users cannot even see it - by definition.
The only affected parties are the actual hardware (is what you've got supported by Nutanix etc?) and the IT support team.
The x3 and higher multipliers mean a lot of customers will be better off elsewhere even if they have to hire a few more people.
The RoI is relatively easy to calculate, and you know that whatever commercial platform/support you switch to is going to be bending over backwards for your custom and is getting a lot of experience in moving workloads away from VMware.
It seems unlikely that Broadcom will actually make a profit before impact.
That's fairly typical of large mergers, as everyone involved in the decision making has short term incentives. They make bank within the first week (sellers), month (middlemen), six months or maybe a year (purchasing VPs).
They couldn't care less if the whole room burns down two years later, they've already banked a ridiculously huge bonus and moved on.
The suit is really part of the seat, it's shaped to fit the wearer to the capsule crash couch so they don't flail around too much during the spam-in-a-can phases of flight.
You absolutely don't want a seam in the wrong place, it could break your arm at splashdown/impact. And if the helmet doesn't support your neck properly...
It's probably too early to standardise the crash couch systems, as there's very little experience as to what's actually a good idea and what merely looked good on paper.
This is a lot more difficult than docking adapters as it involves squishy humans, who come in radically different sizes and aspect ratios.
It didn't do what it was expected to do, so an investigation is required to make sure there's no additional heretofore unforeseen risk elsewhere in the flight plan.
- eg if this was a landing leg failure, perhaps the leg could have fallen off earlier in the flight, or during a contingency flight plan if that had been necessary?
Once the mishap is sufficiently well-understood, they'll return to flight, probably with minor procedure changes - eg replacing a cotter pin after fewer flights.
France can arrest him because he's a French citizen, in France.
The CEOs of those other companies would need to be prosecuted by their respective nations, or extradited. I suspect you can guess exactly how an extradition of (eg) Zuckerberg would go.
Incidentally, that's also why the Russian embassy are being ignored. He's a French citizen, which means it's none of their business.
Back then that was fixable, it's not as if C was actually standardised at the time either.
Even while I was at Uni we were taught a toolchain-specific dialect of C because despite there being a Standard by then, nobody actually fully complied.
That said, I never used Pascal in anger until Delphi, by which time it was already long dead. I don't think I even have access to that toolchain anymore, not without setting up a VM, anyway.
So the actual period really does not include their failure.
Seems it happened a week and a day before the end of the quarter.
Anyone starting their contract that week probably actually signed a couple of weeks or months before - and probably wouldn't be expected to make payments anyway as Net 30 is a usual term.
Existing customers will all be locked into contracts that take six months to a year to cancel, so of course the effect starts Q3 for new customers and for existing customers in 2025 Q2.
Ah yes, the article also says that
I don't want "innovation".
I want boring competency and the ability to keep absolute and total control over my data. I definitely don't want it to be randomly exposed to other tenants or the general Internet.
And I definitely don't want to end up losing access to all my business critical data because somebody else forgot to do something important. Or caught fire.
Those are existential risks. Nobody sane does that!
Africa is rather populous.
China has a long history of building out infrastructure in many of the poorer countries of sub-saharan Africa. It's a great example of "soft power".
There's a few cellular networks already, but the land area to cover is really huge so power and backhaul is a major issue when trying to build those out.
Power isn't too bad as solar PV works well, but backhaul...
Satellite Internet access is pretty much the only way to get widespread coverage - and the local infrastructure is extremely cheap as the base stations can be built wherever there's decent power and backhaul already.
Blue Origin seem to be doing the "simulate like crazy" approach, unlike SpaceX's "toss something in the air and see where it explodes", so I guess it's possible.
I really hope they succeed, but that timeline really seems to rely on there being no unforeseen consequences, which is quite unlikely.
Apple's restrictions mean that it's basically impossible to support iOS or macOS long term.
Apple forces you to send them a copy of literally everything before you can sell it, moves the goalposts every single year, and almost never documents anything. iOS is all of the above and worse.
I've lost count of the products and companies that Apple has killed by either restricting/removing the APIs (sometimes with a replacement, sometimes not, never with much notice), or even suddenly releasing their own version - after having several years of visibility into the product it was about to kill.
If you can't make a profit in the first year, you cannot afford to release anything for Apple platforms. The cost of merely continuing to exist is massive.