weinzierl

That was a helpful bit.

If the improvements were discovered by porting to a different language they very much come down to language choice (even if they can be implemented in the source language of the port).

The "fearless ..." mottos of Rust are not hyperbole but a serious point. They allow you (and the LLM) be brave with optimizations.

Most of CSS's design was informed by that idea. That styling is in separate files in the first place and then all the complicated cascading stuff that is even in the name of the thing.

I've always been fond of that idea and still am but there is no denial that it utterly and completely failed and now we live in a world where all these things are just cargo cult. Sometimes I think it'd be best to finish what Tailwind started and be consequential about it which would mean going back to presential HTML alltogether.

Since WASM ships with a garbage collector that C# can use while Rust does all the memory management itself, of course it will be bigger.

EDIT: Reading OP more thoroughly I think I'm wrong. Apparently in the compared versions, the C# version ships a runtime with garbage collector.

Not at all. It is simply because the tip of a quill and the nib of a traditional[1] fountain pen cannot move in any direction. The way you hold it if you are right handed forbids moving in the "backslash"* direction[2] upwards. You can "draw" from top down but not "shove" upwards in that direction. Since in joined script we start letters mostly from the baseline (and have connecting strokes) this makes the "right leaning slant" much easier to write.

The anatomy of a right handed writer also plays a role. When you write fast, the hand pivots at the wrist and fingers as it moves rightward, and that produces a forward slant.

[1] Modern fountain pen nibs have a little ball at tip. So even if you used on in primary school you might not have noticed the directional effect.

[2] That is why the slash (virgula) has existed for centuries while the backslash is an invention of the computer age.

It uses two different ideas. One game is eight parallel plotlines apparently running on eight tracks of the tape and the interactivity is switching between them. The other is using the content from the tape as a background with a traditional video game overlayed.

It is based on older work from the heyday of VHS where the tape provided to background and the game was a lightgun with a hit counter.

Invent an alternative history in an afternoon or two and gaslight the gullible into your version of reality. I wait for the day where a company is ordered to hand out their communication to a court and instead of doing so hands out an AI invented but plausible one.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_SX-64

It'll not necessarily be that great for every mathematician or scientist.

Loss on every side, still happened.

The doorman was called a doorman because its essential task was the door. Everything else was additional and replaceable or unnecessary in the first place.

Same with AI. Once it has replaced the main task, the rest will adapt around it.

When it comes to hacker culture it has to face different problems. I think a lot of its bad ral comes from psychological reactance and that people just hate unsolicited advice, even if it's excellent and free.

Now, if you don’t care about the sun but about fixed intervals, you can always use TAI.

Standards are there to serve people, and we should have the choice to use the standard that fits our needs best. Changing the meaning of a standard retroactively, with no good reason and when a good alternative is available, is nothing short of irresponsible.

And it's not that we wouldn't have a time without leap seconds. Instead of changing the time definition it would make much more sense to switch to TAI for me. Now we will have tons of UTC code hanging around with support for leap seconds that will never be used and if you want to remove it you will have to distinguish between old and new UTC. Not a fan.

It's likely that we will see an European Starlink but only an "interoperable" one. A cost sharing and robustness measure. Not a sovereign European system.

[1] https://www.gps.gov/news/joint-statement-galileo-and-gps-sig...

The idea is that safe Rust promises that you can't cause UB without unsafe.

Unfortunately there are cases, where the current rust compiler implementation fails to keep that promise. These cases are all tracked as bugs and it's expected they'll be fixed eventually. AFAIK non of the known cases is unfixable, it just takes time and effort, sometime a lot.

Also note that C++ does not make such promises in the first place, so the equivalent code there isn't a bug, it's just UB.

https://www.novinky.cz/clanek/auto-legendarni-kachna-citroen...

The 2CV was designed from the start as one of the cheapest cars possible. Ultra cheap things are rarely considered "style icons" during their heyday.

Again you may be thinking of the DS, which was Citroën's flagship model and its fender skirts were the ultimate expression of cool.