catamorphismic

Indeed, I've been successfully running my email server for the past five years and mail has no problem reaching gmail users.

I think people have just become defeatist.

Very good point. I'd like to add that this is not just kind of ridiculous, it is just plain ridiculous. Also, we have the right to publish any benchmark numbers, not just basic numbers. This isn't a time for weak wording.

Wouldn't the better solution be having compiler support for rejecting compilation of constructs that have UB?

Well just let them continue to do so, then?

> Rust had potential for proof work, but went off in a different direction.

Which direction is that?

Why is it poorly named? I've always liked it.

> You seem to have a poor understanding of both entropy and markets.

And you're a bit assuming and rude. Your argument also isn't as bulletproof you want to make it sound. What is the argument here, anyway? There's no need to improve technique for an average programmer because an outlier system (Facebook) is written in a language commonly associated with poor programming practices, with some handwaving about markets and entropy sprinkled on top?

Can you give a practical example of such nonterminating subexpressions?

The Dexcom G5 website says you should recalibrate with a meter every 12 hours to ensure accurate readings. Do you really have to recalibrate that often?

Behaviorism isn't simply about holding psychology to a higher scientific standard and it is misguided to imply it is the only psychological paradigm to have done so. As an easy counterexample, take a look at cognitive psychology.

Since when is psychology not much of a science?

Blockchains aren't searching for a reason to exist either. Decentralized currencies/conmodities not controlled by any single entity are an obviously useful thing.

> In that case, it can be mathematically shown that you are simply too complicated to be fully correctly simulated by any system that attempts to build a model of your actions simply by external observation of you; you do not produce enough bits in your external actions to uniquely identify the state space of the inside of your head, not even if you turn the entire rest of the universe to the task (literally!).

Really? Which mathematical result is this?

Do scanning techniques such as fMRI and EEG count as external?

This is a common misconception apparently, one that I've fallen prey to myself in the past. Signal removed the option to use the password lock and now uses Android's built-in lock screen functionality to provide auth.

That screen was never meant to serve an encryption role and Moxie recommends using Android's full disk encryption feature to ensure data confidentiality at rest.

Really? The only reason?

What about SNI?

I actually find it is a pretty big and universal pain point while people are learning, particularly when switching languages.

This sounds awfully close to a No True Scotsman type of argument. Also, are you implying only "serious" people should not get speed upon?

"Uniformization" sounds like a better fit, if we are searching for a more conventional word.

> Reddit gets very dark very fast and it is factual that they don't control it nearly as well as they should.

It can never be factual that something should be, since what should be is subjective.

Signal has both gif and emoji support.

> There are ways to discover mutual contacts privately.

Such as? I don't have the URL handy but the Signal team did investigate the literature and known techniques for this a few years ago and found them to be nonviable.

Not that painful (speaking from experience of running one).

> I thought Latex was superior to Word in every way than I had a colleague that knew Word. Word if you learn it is just fine generating a ToC or autonumbering sections, figures, and tables.

No, it doesn't work well even if you know what you're doing. It's much better than when blindly trying to hack your way through, but there are still so many weird quirks it does which you always have to spend a lot of time on.

Why would you need to download the blockchain over Tor? There are many people downloading the blockchain and that in itself does not incriminate you. It seems sufficient to only send out transactions using Tor.

It doesn't sound like you're talking about the same thing. Dan Luu's idea sounded more about adding coverage guidance to QuickCheck, which presently lacks it, not using fuzzing-like mutators.

Search for Tridactyl, which is aiming to reimplement the Vimperator/Pentadactyl feature set in WebExtensions Firefox. It's still in early stages of development but there is already an initial release on AMO with some basic features implemented and with a very familiar feel.

That's weird, Firefox feels much snappier than Chrome to me. It also uses significantly less memory.

How is it not unexpected that a piece of software uploads and saves everything you search for on a remote corporate server? When did this become so commonplace that users don't even blink an eye to it? And more importantly, why would anyone find this acceptable?

> Not necessarily. Everything points to the fact that the human brain (at least, I don't know much about ants) does not work in any way similar to neural networks, and as such there's no guarantee that you can represent its behaviour by the current algorithms.

Yes, the brain is most likely not simply modelling one giant ANN, but it's much more plausible that ANN-like components have a role in it.