MathMonkeyMan
Would you return `input.c_str()`? You might think twice about that, but it's the same thing. My favorite fix is to take a `std::string_view` as the parameter.
string_view remove_leading_spaces(string_view input) {
auto new_start = find_if(input.begin(), input.end(), [](char ch) { return ch != ' '; });
return string_view(new_start, input.end());
}
The result of the undefined behavior in your program is surprising, though. As it usually is.The trouble comes when you have data structures that manage memory, and you want to associate the allocation strategy with the particular instance of the data structure. Or, worse, you don't store the allocator pointer with the data and you require that all functions operating on the data structure happen to use compatible allocators.
At its simplest, though, passing allocators around is just removing an implicit global variable that is sometimes helpful to customize locally, but nearly impossible to customize locally if left as a global.
> I’d like to be clear that there are legitimate uses of remote attestation. By using a website that requires attested passkeys you can be sure you stay safe from accidentally installing a scammer’s fake passkey application that steals your data – the website will reject such a passkey. You might want an attested Passkey even if the website doesn’t require it, since you can use attestation to verify that your software has not been tampered with by a hacker while you weren’t looking.
> As for reasons to not want attestation: you might want to be able to use software that Twitter (formally X) doesn’t specifically approve of, such as Linux. Or a phone with a refurbished operating system.
So the bad timeline is the one in which the industry gradually transitions to "you can't log on unless everything about your system is exactly as we want." Figures.
The article's points still stand, but the trick didn't work this one time.
[1]: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/utilities/V...
I was always team "RFK Jr clearly bad," but to be honest I didn't put much work into forming that opinion.
Interested to hear more!
> other than an interest to interfere in US commerce on behalf of foreign entities.
No longer interested!
The article does beat around the bush and the headline is clickbait. I assumed from the title that these datacenters were not paying their bills, but instead it's about the extent to which the operators should pay for public infrastructure built due to the datacenter being built. That's an interesting question, but I don't like the goalpost begin moved from "not paying their full costs" to "not paying what I define as a 'fair share'."
Then I disabled my ad blocker to see how much data comes down. So far it's at 31 MB, but it increases without bound by a few KB per second.
I suspect it is for everybody, but I might be blowing smoke up my own ass.
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/grammar/comments/1ssrby/an_history_...
More generally, do you choose the article as if the first letter of the initialism were pronounced or as if the first word of the initialism were pronounced? Does it differ with acronyms? Does it differ between the UK and America?
Or I could go back to IPv4 with dynamic DNS, but that would mean changing domain registrars.
david@carbon12:~ $ dig +short AAAA home.davidgoffredo.com
2603:7000:5101:de1c::cafe:babe
I'll have to look into it, thanks for the QA testing everyone.- [pic](https://home.davidgoffredo.com/hackernews/proper-time-one-li...)
- [plot](https://home.davidgoffredo.com/hackernews/proper-time-one-li...)
I found it hard to believe that they accounted for other forces precisely enough that they could attribute the phase change to gravity, but this is beyond me so I trust the result.
At first I thought "they showed that you can measure a particle falling in gravity," which seemed dumb because we already know that particles fall in gravity. But they showed that you can measure a single (aggregate) particle falling in gravity, which is pretty cool because if gravity is quantum then that means that they observed an interaction between the graviton and their rubidium atom.