Guvante

Private window is called out in the article as creating a second entity

To keep the user engaged since "doing nothing" is the default action for people

Intent is fundamental to all criminal cases

The intent of auto play on YouTube is not to defraud ad agencies

Why do you pretend that humans are equivalent to bots?

And if you think skipping ads means the advertising agency gets screwed you are kind of showing ignorance...

Auditing logs is a crazy interpretation of "another person may view it"

But that doesn't align with your phrasing above

Feel free to quote in the article what supports your summary given the article doesn't actually talk about that

In fact it mentions insurance fraud as the cause...

Additionally it certainly wasn't increasing cost but reduced income which is a very different issue

Property taxes are unrelated to income tax

Most of your examples would not be considered harm for another...

Null terminated strings were an intentional compromise, known to be inferior for execution but superior for memory

Null being an "allowed" value for pointers is the mistake e.g. what became nullptr. "Allowed" because garbage values are garbage.

I mean when comparing to machines though the only thing the machines are better at is maybe not getting distracted while humans tend to be better at adapting which is usually important for safety to put it mildly

After all the first Tesla auto drive fatality was literally "that is probably a sign not a trunk"...

Object pooling is just malloc that is a little cheaper and maybe a different failure case when you are full...

If you have a good method to handle the equivalent of OOM then they can make a difference in how the program runs but normally they are just a performance optimization.

Honestly with 64 bit addresses it would be nice if address reuse were eliminated but that requires memory movement of a different kind (probably just as dangerous) or some terrible paging work for the OS...

They didn't even get a good photo of the final product...

The only shot I saw was "while I was writing them" why not show what it looks like while in use?

You paint the sponsors in an unnecessarily negative light here.

They want to fund code they will use and that requires updating versions to be doable for like a million not twenty million.

Everyone loses site of the massive sizes of the codebases involved. When your codebase is measured in millions LoC minor breaks can be devastating.

Minor steps are fine and appreciated but "rip off the bandaid" is better left to alternative projects like Rust.

Replace C++ code with Rust is happening at a glacial pace, basically involving full rewrites of the module replaced and significant work to refactor the surrounding code to support it.

(This is why Rust is focusing heavily on interop right now, if it is easier to integrate more projects can use it)

The problem is updating a decently sized program from one version of a compiler to another can take man months to do and that doesn't typically include intentional breaking changes.

A C++ change that requires updating 1% can be several hundreds of thousands of updates which is on the scale of beyond a man year depending on if you can regex cheat.

The fear the author is glossing over (I wouldn't say ignore they acknowledge there are reasons) is when faced with a man year to update people just don't.

Especially when the most interesting breaking changes don't tend to be synthetic (you can just make modules look like code you couldn't write before after all) but instead be subtle changes in behavior.

That means that you won't necessarily even know all the breakages which is a horrifying concept.

Why would you want to invest in a consumable asset class?

Even if Nvidia hit a wall and can't outclass its old chips they still have a significant experation date on them since using them in data center situations destroys them over relatively short time frames for finance (a few years).

Note that for an asset class the fact that they can last longer isn't important, if they are fungible it means investors need to predictably know the lifespan which requires pessimistic usage assumptions.

I thought Cargo did a simple SemVer check and then imported both if there was a conflict

My understanding was NP is when you test and rebuild the graph over and over which doesn't need to happen if you isolate or fail

I feel like the write up doesn't really engage with the number one solution used

Don't allow the hard ones

Dependency managers tend to just block a huge category of situations that effectively eliminate the entire NP hard space

Type systems similarly are explicitly cordoned off

The trick isn't "do it anyway" beyond you kind of definitionly need to, it is to acknowledge the general problem is "impossible" so either do your best or start eliminating the impossible

I haven't seen any algebraic effects system that is that powerful

The closest is linear types but even then drop isn't an effect but also a function you can call to allow not continuing the references

Paraphrasing for "hard to understand" but with an emphasis on internalizing.

Most people generally fundamentally know what 30 means in their unit but might have a harder time with 303 (or 272)

You can say the same thing about decades

No one says 6 even though it has a very reasonable information density for conversations. It is either a relative year or a two digit one.

You want numbers to be understandable and K produces illogical numbers.

(There is a reason it is common to drop the century when talking about years, humans are less skilled at numbers over 100)

And I know temperatures in Fahrenheit go higher but it is common to refer to Phoenix as "over 100" even when it's high can peak over 120.

There should be publicly available data about how expensive class action lawsuits are to the court.

I would personally categorize it as as subsidized not paid for since the lawyers get nothing if they fail which is a meaningful cost.

None of this is to say I support the current system. Class action lawsuits are now designed to get settlements that save the company targeted millions or more compared to the actual damage agreed to.

And giving the lawyers millions when each litigant is lucky to get $20 is not reasonable.

No one means that in the literal sense BTW it is shorthand for.

"The next purchase I make will be through X to avoid having to search for a new retailer"

I miss Windows 7 notepad. I liked it just being a text editor and found a ton of value out of it.

Notepad++ and similar having forever tabs you don't have to explicitly close is cool but I ran programs like that when I wanted that...

My point was it isn't as simple as projectors are better.

To be clear I only know this because I was totally going to swap to a projector once I bought a place only to realize they don't work well during the day.

I was responding to projectors...

Multi use rooms require TVs.

Projectors cannot handle ambient light without being a fire hazard.

Except that doesn't matter here, IP isn't why you can't destroy emails.

You can't destroy emails because they law says those are evidence.

The firing people because of AI thing is similar to the RTO thing, assuming everyone saying they are doing X because Y is falling for the simplest form of deception.

Firing people to bet against a downturn is self fulfilling. Firing people to bet for a thing everyone says is good isn't.