duaneb

We should really require commenting while downvoting unreplied comments. The community has gotten lazy.

I'll be the devils advocate. Why? I can understand calculus perfectly fine without understanding how people got there. In fact, I'd argue much of what you learn before call--in the order of discovery--actively hinders understanding.

If anyone has a clue why this was downvoted, please clue me in. It was on topic and indicating missing information.

Edit: I really don't care how much I get downvoted, I'm going to highlight its uselessness until someone cares to justify it.

Well, it's basically duck typed, but without type values you can assign. Doesn't surprise me much.

...yet.

Fix for some value of fix. Go's lack of generics make the data structure offerings pitiful. Just look at heap: it's worse than c.

There is a role for a language like that, but calling it fixing c++ ignores 90% of the reasons people use c++ in the first place. In fact, id say that go reminds me most of the version of c++ that operated as a preprocessor. It's almost exactly the same template implementation!

Sure. It's also why the internet is super vulnerable to 0-days.

> The actual decision needed could be done in a couple of Slack messages between two programmers

In my experience, those two programmers rarely have a good enough understanding of existing codebase and momentum to make good decisions. Without meetings, there is little way to avoid these problems.

Programmers are good at implementation, not (necessarily) decision making.

Also, meetings only make sense if everyone is focused on decision making; this is a company culture issue more than anything.

Wow, I never realized operators couldn't push fixes to their routers without permission. The internet is indeed a tragedy of the commons: trivial to ruin, but a Sisyphean task to fix.

In many jobs that's totally worth it—chances are very low a stranger will need something high priority from you, and people who work with you will know how to communicate.

Email is good for a lot of things, but not for expecting processing quickly.

More likely, but how much more? That seems necessary to discern to make that decision rationally.

Charge $10 to look up the owner of the property would probably look fine.

Why is that awful? The script obviously worked....

Change your name to a random hash. Should work fine.

> It's not really about population -- it's about having no future, which is something a lot of people constantly worry about.

One thing the movie (unintentionally) got right was how absurd this is. It really ruined the movie to me, TBH, because it was laughably implausible. Reproduction is what life does best.

I'll obviously have to watch again for the world building....

That is not tautological. Interest and relevance are different things.

Probably on their parent's account.

The comments on the New York Times seem to be high quality.

This is exactly the type of attitude that makes me dread the future. Why invest in technology at all?

Wires are great, honestly. Easy to debug and use. The original zero config.

They aren't Uber and they exist.

There aren't any taxis anymore in SF.

Not before destroying any competition with cripplingly low rates. That's the problem: I can't hail a goddamn taxi anymore, despite it being cheaper by any back of the envelope calculation for society as a whole.

Why? It appears to have no value to anyone but the immediate consumer. That's not a business, it's a charity. What a collossal waste of cash.

You can just overwrite the WBC variables once you read them in process.

TBH, though, if they are sniffing env variables from processes there's not reason not to sniff that process's memory directly.

No you misunderstand, this is horizontally scalable humanity. This is how you bootstrap training models.

In this sense, plan 9 is more unix than unix....

While I get your point, I don't think data is clearly not information, it's just that the whole point of passwords is to be secret.

Hell, the Linux kernel isn't very unix-ish. It's a kernel.

> Commuters just want to get to work reliably and they'd like a seat.

You forgot to mention afford it. Uber is jacking up the prices for those who depend entirely on public transit--the people who most likely feed you, clean your office, drive your Uber. The people who make the city function. Your convenience actively fucks over your neighbors.

Reasonable? Sure. Close minded? Absolutely.

> Commuters just want to get to work reliably and they'd like a seat.

You forgot to mention afford it. Uber is jacking up the prices for those who depend entirely on public transit--the people who most likely feed you, clean your office, drive your Uber. The people who make the city function. Your convenience actively fucks over your neighbors.