That still exists BTW. It’s called Lomiri now.

I’m referring to nondeterminism for the same prompt, since unless you start a session from scratch, it’s unlikely you’ll have the same history. If you give it a prompt, then depending on what you’ve told it previously, it may blow up in your face.

Tbh them being nondeterministic is a big part of why they’re so unreliable. Like, maybe it’ll work fine for 9/10 people, but then there will be that one person whose home directory gets wiped for whatever reason. Or maybe it’ll do math right for those nine people, but then for that one person it’ll say 1 + 1 = 11.

You’re basically gambling if you don’t verify the answers.

What exactly do you mean by “permissions” here? It sounds like you’re just talking about basic Unix-style permissions. Also, what do you mean by “only the one based on BSD?”

Unless you’re talking about Mac OS 9 and earlier (like more than 20 years old), all their OSes have permissions and are based on BSD at this point.

Standard Unix permissions also aren’t gonna save you when you run an exploitable program as your home user and it can then access everything in your home directory (in other words, pretty much all of your important files for most users).

Last I checked, FreeBSD frequently includes very outdated versions of stuff like OpenSSL. It also lacks privilege separation for pkg/ports. Of course, there are Linux distributions with these same problems, but there are also ones that don’t have them.

Also, a lot of the practical problems with desktop usage stem from most/all of your valuable data being in the home directory and everything running as the same user with no real filesystem restrictions (can be different if you’ve got something like SELinux configured correctly). AFAIK FreeBSD doesn’t do anything to make this less of a problem than Linux.

To anyone who knows more about this: does this actually do anything particularly unique to avoid collecting user data, or is it basically just “trust us bro” and we just need to rely on the privacy policy and so on? It seems like DuckDuckGo but European everything (and with more of an AI focus) from my reading here.

Tbh it’s linked to a ton of things (lots of cancers), so it’d be a pretty big deal in general if they’re able to scale it into something widely usable.

If you weren’t implying that people from those areas aren’t allowed to provide opinions because presumably in this context they’d be slanted against China, then your post had absolutely no relevance. So, why did you bother posting it?

This is kind of proving his point tbh.

I think this is true for all games that access the internet. However, it seems an especially large number of Chinese games that make it to the West require an internet connection to function. Sometimes it makes sense (multiplayer mechanics, gacha, etc.), sometimes it doesn’t at all (some relatively popular single-player RPGs with no online play require a connection just to make a save file, for example).

This is just to say I understand people being concerned if all they see are these Chinese online-required games everywhere when they can also find some random completely offline game made in America, Europe, Japan, etc. just as easily (or even a game with an optional online mode that can be disabled without the game breaking).

Shouldn’t my obvious willingness to engage with people about this topic serve as some sort of indicator that I’m serious and not “drive by”?

Shouldn’t the fact that I’m not being rude or crass like the other poster you brought up (to achieve rhetorical ends I’m not exactly clear on!) be an indicator that my input should be taken seriously?

Given that you replied quite positively to the dude who wrote about the maintainers being “cucks” and keep talking about the “perverse incentives of rust,” the answer is no.

I’m going to block you now, byebye.

The requirements are not at all strict. Submit even one bug report or issue, or do literally anything positive rather than show up for the first time and whine about the management of the project or whatever out of nowhere and then maybe people will take your opinion more seriously.

The threads are indeed filled with people like you given that in a number of your posts you went and complained about Rust as a whole. This is ignoring that the other highly upvoted (license-related) top-level post in this very thread (before it got deleted by mods) called the project maintainers cucks and so on.

Anyway, now I’m actually done.

You don’t need to be a programmer to contribute. That’s just your bias. Anyway, I’m done with this.

If they’ve been living in Canada 30 years, these are overall probably not the sort of people who are gonna use this (unless the political climate in the US changes significantly I guess). Most of the right wingers I know have a very “America is better than Canada, why would I want to be Canadian?” sort of view.

Yeah, obviously isn’t the case everywhere, but I think such extreme temperature ranges are kind of rare (excluding random one-off days that are super cold or hot for whatever reason).

For places that get super cold (like below 0F a lot), generally Celsius probably makes more sense in terms of scaling.

I think it’s sort of useful for weather, since in most places you’re not gonna see temperatures under 0F or above 100F much if at all, so the scaling seems a bit easier. Other than that though, yeah, it’s pretty terrible.

In a recent analysis, Adam Harvey found that among the 999 most popular crates on crates.io, around 17% contained code that do not match their code repository.

17%!

Let me rephrase this, 17% of the most popular Rust packages contain code that virtually nobody knows what it does (I can’t imagine about the long tail which receives less attention).

Given that he lied about the results of the analysis he is using to prove his point, I find it hard to trust anything in this article.

In the analysis, Harvey said only 8 repositories did not match their upstream repos. The other problems were issues like not including the VCS info, squashing history, etc.

EDIT: Also, I just noticed that he called it a “recent” analysis. It’s roughly a two year old analysis. I expect things have improved a bit since then, especially since part of the problem was packaging using older versions of Cargo.

At least they haven’t said something this fucking dumb AFAIK. Plus the US govt owns a stake in Intel.

I’m actually looking into this right now. Other than tracking down all the birth certificates and stuff, it seems pretty straightforward.

The bill is C-3, since the article didn’t seem to mention it.

Lol I guess everyone who uses Linux and has contributed absolutely nothing to the kernel should be taken quite seriously when they drive-by on the kernel mailing list and start complaining about the management of the project.