And because corporations aren’t people, here’s the CEOs that ran things during 2014:
Hans Vestberg (b 1965) Verizon
Randall Lynn Stephenson (b 1960) AT&T
Glen F Post (b 1952) CenturyLink
We let these people act with impunity in our society but it doesn’t need to be this way. Look at how Elon, who thrives on attention, flips out over being tracked and heckled. They stole hundreds of billions from us but we don’t even act like it.
You use lifetimes to annotate parameters and return values in order to tell the compiler about how long things must last for your function to be valid. You can link a specific input with the output, or explicitly separate them. If you don’t give lifetimes the language uses some basic rules to do it for you. If it can’t, eg it’s ambiguous, then it’s a compile error and you need to do it manually.
It’s one of the harder concepts of rust to explain succinctly. But imagine you had a function that took strA and strB, used strB to find a subsection of strA, and then return a slice of strA. That slice is tied to strA. You would use 'a annotation for strA and the return value, and 'b for strB.
Rust compiler will detect the lifetime being shorter than expected.
Also, ownership semantics. Think c++ move semantics. Only one person is left with a good value, the previous owners just have garbage data they can’t use anymore. If you created a thing on the heap and then gave it away, you wouldn’t have it anymore to free at the end. If you want to have “multiple owners” then you need ref counting and such, which also stops this problem of premature freeing.
Edit: one more thing: reference rules. You can have many read-only references to a thing, or one mutable reference. Unless you’re doing crazy things, the compiler simply won’t let you have references to a thing, and then via one of those references free that thing, thereby invalidating the other references.
Nearly all guns will have a legal upstream source, so it stands to reason that taxes can directly impact people selling guns used in crimes, indirectly impacts those who sell them under the table, extracts money from gun owners who as a class aren’t being as responsible as they should, and fundamentally reduces the amount of guns in circulation.
I don’t see a negative. It’s foss so you ought to be relaxed about others using your code. The issues are probably just articulating problems that were already there. If it’s stuff you don’t care about… it’s a foss repository so you just ignore it.
Looks like a lava shader material preview but instead of a ball they used something food shaped.
Not SO or it’s methods, I mean the human experience. It can be awkward to be new to it all and to feel the frustration/tunnel vision associated with being stuck on one problem… and then step back and have to dissect your issue, structure your question correctly, etc.
It’s just how it is, for exactly the reasons you stated. You can capture every little problem people face in programming, or you can hone in on useful patterns in goals, problems, and solutions, and educate people on how to see these things.
The idea of SO is a little awkward too I think. With something like Wikipedia we’re presumably in an academic mindset. Carefully gathering information, sources, structuring it all. And even then people can get turned off by the ‘bureaucracy’ or nitpicking or whatever.
When people show up at SO they’re probably more in a “I can’t figure this damn thing out!” mode. We’re struggling with a problem, keeping a bunch of junk in our head, patience being tested, but we’re still expected to have a bit of academic rigor in our question and discourse.
Yeah but a lot of people don’t really know what SO is for. They think you just go there and get help and call it a day. But the entire point is to produce structured questions, discourse, and answers aimed at future readers. Super specific, no-context, or duplicate problems are not useful. If you are not trying to generate useful content, don’t go to SO.
Just look at all the people getting frustrated at being told “you should probably do it a different way.” They really don’t understand that just because they’re asking the question, it’s not all about them.
She lied about meeting a world leader and had a fake story about it to make her look tough. She’s on TV as I write this and she can’t even answer any questions about it without dodging. She’s such a real character!
Just curious, but does your favorite genre include guitars and drums?
Isn’t “it’s good enough for most users” a little too close to “it’s good enough to be bought, used for a bit, and then tossed”? Usually computers that were adequate for X stop being able to do X. There’s little to no margin and you can’t upgrade it?
deleted by creator
Not taking pills, or taking them improperly, can be fatal. OP doesn’t care because they have a personal belief. They said that they would die on that hill, which is a poor choice of words because other people might literally die for their belief.
Jesus Christ. What a psychopath. You’re talking about dying on a hill when it will be others who die for your belief.
Interesting idea. We could effectively practice eugenics in a way that won’t make people so mad. They’ll have to contend with ideas like free will and personal responsibility before they can go after our program.
Let’s make a list of all the “asocials” we want removed from the gene pool and we can get started.
The person said that things are so bad now you can’t process it anymore. They’re implying the world is getting worse and that it’s overwhelming.
The reply is trying to help the person see that they’re responsible for the lopsided intake of negativity, not the world.
I’m not reading into it literally, that’s the point. On the surface, Carlin “tells it like it is.” He says things that the people agree with.
You know what? Just look at the praise for Carlin. You’ll see things like “genius” and “prophet” or “brilliant insight.”
Then look at people criticizing him like me. Suddenly people defend his character by pointing out he’s just a comedian, it’s just jokes, judge him as a comedian, it’s not serious, etc.
He’s the Trump of his domain.
In a scenario where the average IQ is 200? Do you understand what you’re talking about? You realize that the majority of people are exactly average, with a bit fuzziness, right? No? Then I guess Carlin is for you.
You were always a sack of shit, don’t pretend it’s because other people did something.
Why walk when you can ride?