PopsiclePete

What is Dutch food anyway? Bitterballen? Just some salted fish on a thin slice of rye? Seems like everyone there in your neck of the woods eats Italian basically? I spent a solid month in Amsterdam once and the most "Dutch" thing I ate was....Indonesian?

We were extremely lucky, yes. Not to mention he was Jewish and being born, say, even just 15 years later than he was, could've meant he'd have ended up in concentration camp and we'd still have no theory of relativity. That's quite possible.

There was less competition but it was also tremendously difficult to even see what others are doing, or to learn from them, or to even talk to them....just being in possession of scientific texts was enough to get you killed not too long before Newton's time. That makes his accomplishments more impressive to me, not less.

Here's an analogy.

I'd be more impressed by a medieval European serf if that serf could create the Intel 8086 than by you if you designed the next AMD 32-core processor.

We can't prove that. It feels good to believe it, sure, but it's also possible that precisely zero people working in sweatshops have ever had Einstein's talent.

Sure, it's easy to say - take away the sweatshops, provide them with UBI and voila - suddenly we have 5000 Einsteins on our hands.

But it's also possible we'll still have zero. It's not like we don't have millions of people leading "cushy" (by comparison lives) in the West already, yet - no more Einsteins?

I think people are getting hung up too much on the "their own" part vs "full of geniuses" part.

Ok, fine, if three - instead of one - people - out of billions - came up with a revolutionary new idea - that does not, to me, discount the idea of the "lone genius", just because 2 > 1 and we can't strictly use the word "lone" anymore.

The idea would be discounted, if say, 500 million people all invented calculus independently of each other over a period of 5 months.

And yet - why are so few others capable of standing on the shoulders of said giants? Here I am, with more giants' shoulders to stand on, if I wished it, with easy access to vast wealth of information that Newton (or someone living in the 1980's) couldn't even dream of - and yet - my contributions to calculus are precisely zero.

I studied drumming for 6 years and could easily be outmatched (and have been) skill-wise by a 5-year-old with talent.

Are there just no "geniuses" at all? Could anyone paint the Sistine Chapel? Carve out David? Paint the Mona Lisa? Play drums for Led Zeppelin? Invent new fields in mathematics? Is 99.9999% of humanity just ... what? lazy?

>But you can't fire people because you think they probably have the wrong opinions based on things they said 5 years ago, that's Soviet level repression.

"Soviet level repression" would be sending Mr Martinez to a forced labor camp; maybe his relatives disappear, that sort of thing.

If I find out that a coworker of mine attended a White Power rally a few years ago, or stormed the Capitol this January, you bet I'm bringing it up to my manager in a "it's either me or them" conversation. And I won't be the only one on my team.

You may be cool working with all manner of assholes, doesn't mean other people should be.

If you started your adult life with the same help from Daddy that Trump had - and did nothing, literally besides putting all of that money into an index fund - you’d be richer than Trump is today. They did the math.

So what exactly are Trump’s accomplishments? It’s not like the dude started off selling hot dogs. He made a lot of shitty investments, lost a lot of money, and is one of the few people on this planet capable of bankrupting a casino. In Vegas.

Yes he’s famous, of course, but his “look at me I’m a successful billionaire” image is all smoke and mirrors.

Go back in time a thousand years and tell people that one day man will fly faster than a bird and land on the moon.

FTL is not impossible. The only thing physics say is that you can’t accelerate a particle that has mass past c because that would require infinite energy. But accelerating an object doesn’t have to be the only way to move “faster” than light.

Look at our civilization today and compare it to what it was a thousand or two thousand years back. Now imagine a civilization that’s had three hundred thousand year head start on us.

Who’s to say they haven’t mastered wormholes or bending gravity or harnessing dark energy to accomplish things that are purely in the realm of science fiction today?

What happens? You become the most-widely used language on the planet? The Python 2-3 wars are over. Python 3 won.

backwards compatibility is a bitch.

But yes, there's a reason why high-visibility C++ projects like Chrome basically white-list 30% of the language and keep it that way, to some small sub-set they feel is "good enough".

The problem is the fragmentation this causes. I pick these 5 features of the language, you pick another 7, I can't use your lib, etc, etc.

C++ is becoming extremely bloated. Bjarne said as much in one of his recent criticisms at the highly-specialized use-case proposals that people wanted to make "standard".

I enjoyed his C++11 book but now that's probably all outdated "oh we don't do it that way anymore" stuff and I can't afford to just buy 2-3 1000-page books every year to keep up. Got better things to do.

> on their most important product.

If Ubuntu depended on random users pointing their browsers to ubuntu.com and then clicking a download link to download and burn an ISO, they'd be long, long gone. There hasn't been any real $$$ in that since, well, forever?

I think it's a pretty mediocre language because of the compiler intrinsic data structures and functions like maps and slices that cannot be created by the language proper. It can be verbose and tedious, some of the std lib stuff like "context" ends up "infecting" everything (ala async/await), variable shadowing sucks, still has "nil" instead of something more modern and safe like Rust's Result<T>, etc, etc.

If I had designed this language in a "design a new programming language" college class, I'd probably have gotten a C+ for my efforts at best.

What Go is, is a great tool more than a great language. I like to use it because my output from it is usually reliable, is on time, is light on resources, is easy to deploy, and allows me to get kudos at my job and more $$$. It's wonderful screwdriver for today's screws.

But I don't think it's a great language the way a LISP is a great language, or Smalltalk, or Haskell, or OCaml. It won't really open your eyes to a new way of thinking about problems that you didn't already know from your C days. You still have too much interface{} stuff everywhere, or reflection (which is extremely tedious) or pretty-awful code generation compared to LISP macros.

If your application needs support for new emojis or some dead language, then yes.

So everyone is equally empowered to make decision on the strategic direction of the company?

If I got hired tomorrow at Google, I should just be able to decide to kill off Android and Chrome, yeah?

>Avoid inheritance. Once an object is instantiated, don't change its internal state. etc.

Just embrace Clojure then. You get all that enforced for you, plus the entire Java eco-system.

> but simplicity trumps doing either of those things well.

That's the genius (?) of Go. They gave us what we didn't know we needed.

Software people love the "manliness" that comes with "serious", "real" programming languages. Maybe it's the desire to impress our peers with our intelligence? But in the end the only thing that matters is whether you can get your shit done and on time in at least a semi-working state.

Twenty years ago, I'd have been more willing to agree with that. I could see the US Gov't as some sort of sinister, hyper-competent (and even malevolent?) force that could definitely keep a secret like that forever from us, and "disappear" those that get too nosy.

Now? Not so much. Looking at who our "representatives" are - failed football coaches, regular conspiracy nuts - there's no way in hell that this "knowledge" would remain locked away for years, decades. Not with clowns like these in charge.

And after the tribunals are setup and operational and people are getting executed - would it be enough then? Or not quite yet still? What's your "this is enough, guys" point? Do you have one?

We got mighty close this time, didn't we? Do we need to get "closer"? Should Nancy Pelosi have had to be captured by some "patriot" with zip-ties and an AR-15?

So what do we do instead? Just continue down this path until 75% of Americans "feel oppressed" and that "BLM and Antifa and Democrats are Marxists and enemies of the people"? Yeah? 'cause that's not working out.

Or are you kind of thinking it is working out and it's your desired outcome?

The Right is excellent at projecting and playing "the victim" so I wouldn't be surprised.

I'm not sure anyone in the (near) future will be able to guarantee you some sort of "right" that you can host/publish whatever you want and not be held accountable.

America is a country that prides itself (to an absolute ridiculous fault) on "freedom of speech" and "the free market will handle it". Well, the market handled it, didn't it. When the government fell short, the market stepped in.

The last 20 years have polarized society to the breaking point. To think that we can continue down this path and be governable, as a people...it's just not happening. The "free ride" we've enjoyed so far is basically over. Sadly, too many Americans can't tell conspiracy theories and made-up fairy-tales from reality and so now we all lose.

The coming administration already has an axe to grind with Big Tech and they will grind it. Both the Left and the Right want to see Big Tech reigned in in some way and even though the reasons might be different, the end result will be the same - host "uncomfortable" content and be censored.

I’ve been using docked on macOS for the past 5 years and it’s been quite pleasant. I had a few times when CPU was spiking and that was fixed with subsequent patches. Definitely over a year ago. I don’t think “constant CPU pegging” is a typical docker-on-Mac experience?

That's Electron for ya. We decided that javascript was thew ay to write cross-OS UI's. God help us.

There's probably a middle ground but you know that within a day of making it optional, the various "Clean my Mac" utilities will have an option to disable it and soon enough instead of 99% of people having it enabled, 75% will have it dibbled. And then some malware hits and spreads like wildfire and the same people who were so adamant on disabling it are now complaining that Apple isn't doing enough to protect them and woowee Macs are just as insecure as Windows.

Speaking of Windows, they also moved to a "we know what's best for you" model with Windows 10.

Definitely a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation.

I understand why "power users" feel frustrated but also understand the company's POV. A story like "Macs are invulnerable to this latest ransomware attack" looks pretty good to investors; the random complaints of nerds and power users go mostly unnoticed.

I bet $100 this latest scandal will not affect Apple's bottom line nor will anyone care within a month - there'll be other reasons to be outraged over on Twitter.

I feel like there's some over-reaction here. You pretty much have to either: 1. allow blanket access to all executables 2. perform some sort of validation/verification

Most people are not as technical as the people on this site, and we know that blanket access to all executables is not a great idea. MacOS is not immune to malware.

Having executables be signed means the signature has to be checked and the certificate has to be checked to see if it hasn't been revoked. I don't see how to do that without "phoning home" and checking, tbh.

I mean yes Apple could enable some expert setting or something for developer/expert types where you can say "trust me I know what I'm doing" but a lot of people who don't know what they're doing will enable that and then malware will run rampant again.

It's a shitty situation. But I'm not going to go down the paranoia rabbit-hole of assuming this is done to spy on me. At least not yet.

Or maybe the definition of "Civil War" is more fluid than we think? I don't expect large-scale devastation and cities in ruins like in Syria, no.

But let's do some fun math. Roughly 70 million voted for Trump. Take away the housewives, the boomers, the Latinos in Florida and the less fanatical, more old-school Republicans that delivered Texas.

So let's say "only" a million are left out of the 70 and let's say that "only" a third of those - so 300k are willing to go to war for "their" President.

That's still huge trouble for this country. No, we won't be a failed state but a never-ending far-right insurgency that right-wing and foreign media constantly encourage and feed while the GOP publicly disavow is not something that we know how to deal with either.

The Left will be on the receiving end of it all by its very nature it will be reluctant to confront it beyond "let's talk about it".

This is what I try to explain when it comes to "why are you paying so much for Apple". Because when you buy a cheap Android phone from Xuoiamiaeoi or whatever, you get some custom crippled OS in god knows what ways in close to 0 long-term support from them.

Do you blame them? How many cops need to be exonerated for the blatant murder of our fellow citizens before "disband the police" actually starts sounding semi-reasonable?

Roughly 50% of voters in this election voted for Trump. His approval rating amongst his own voters is in the high 90%'s. If Trump is saying that the election is fraudulent and undermining the Democratic institutions of this country, then by definition all of his supporters are complicit.

How is 50% of a nation's eligible voting population thinking that their future government is illegitimate not a societal failure?

You gotta hand it to Putin. Two more election cycles like this and the US is toast and he never had to fire. a single shot. Turns out all you need to do is weaponize social media and use it against a country with low education standards like the US and you win.

Meanwhile we are building multi-billion super-carriers and investing in stealth technology and all Putin needs is a troll farm in St Petersburg whispering that America's biggest threat is BLM, Socialists and Obama/Biden/Democratic boogeyman.

Before just telling all pollsters to get another job and abandoning/ignoring everything, shouldn't we find out why the polls were so far off...again?

Were Trump voters not willing to admit they were going to vote for Trump? Was it something else? Did they just assume that college-educated people would prefer Biden 10-1 when it was instead 6-4 or something?