bcjdjsndon

> Rust allows you to achieve with syntax what these good codebases achieve through diligence

Rustaeceans often play this card... What you should really say is safe rust achieves it through syntax, yet as a systems language you will need to invoke unsafe rust, which by definition is not "memory safe". And memory unsafe is bad right? So bad it's worth changing the language to avoid it.... Yet rust doesnt avoid it?

I'm just not as impressed by that as you are

> People using a tool in the wrong way is not necessarily an argument against the tool though

Apart from when that tool is a memory unsafe language though...

Isn't rust as a replacement to c one of the central selling points of rust? Ie the tool is crap because people are misusing it

> A great deal of Rust code need not ever involve the unsafe block, and in these cases there is no great temptation to stray off this path

Rust was an attempt to have the compiler manage memory, but they couldn't crack it, so they had to just push all the failures to conquer c style UB under rusts unsafe keyword...

Good codebases already do what rust is doing with the borrow checker, it's not rocket science.

There's a serious argument for cherry picking rusts good parts and Retrofitting them into a more entrenched language.

Youve essentially listed the same point four different ways... Rust merely kicks the UB can down the road.

1. And? The unsafe code could still be memory unsafe

2. But coders can't be trusted to manually manage memory, otherwise you'd just use c++ right? Doesn't matter whether it's marked unsafe or not, you could do that on c code.

3. Not in unsafe rust, that's my whole point. There is only vague guidance on correct unsafe rust. (Because they haven't managed to crack the problem, just draw a perimeter around them)

4. See point 2 rebuttal

> Similar to accepting code with empty or nonsensical `catch` blocks.

You can still find a lot of that in production code though. You're imagining a perfect world where everyone does the correct thing, but id that world existed we would need rust in the first place

Cos that worked in the past right? Remember when Devs weren't checking error codes so languages added exceptions that were apparently meant to fix that gap. Except for the reality was a lot of empty try/catch blocks, or the errors just getting ignored anyway.

Same thing will happen to unsafe rust once it becomes ubiquitous and we will be back talking about how to fix the problem of stupid coders

The area to which you assign that index is arbitrary.

> The Sahara in its current state is much more barren in terms of ecological diversity than it once was.

Then answer me this... What would be an appropriate level of diversity?

The man said this...

> I try to keep myself sharp by still manually doing a fair amount of things in my life.

I then list a load of shit that shows hes doing next to fuck all manually.

The man is larping.

The man is surrounded by technologys of convenience.... Is he manually communicating or using a computer and the internet? How does he get everywhere? What about Aircon, heating? I'm guessing he has a fridge, oven, telephone, various white goods. As he doesn't live like the Amish, how does he get his gas, water, electricity... pull then from the ground himself?

So yes, he's larping if he thinks not using an llm is the humble life

> Like why sculpt anything by hand when you can just get AI do model and then 3d print it.

Recreation is different, you're doing it for the fun of it, to learn.

This is a common misdirection. Nobody is charting with an AI song. Nobody cares about AI pop music. People are however using ai for jingles, interstitials, elevator music etc because nobody cares if some failed musician has poured his heart and soul into a theme tune for the menu of an educational dvd, they just want the end product... Nobody cares if formulaic crap is soulless, because it already was.

So why do you even need a machine in the first place if they're practical skills?

I suppose it builds its own server etc as well

> The earth is a system of many systems

As I've pointed out, these are arbitrary, they make it easier for humans to reason about the problem, but they don't exist. Purely in your head.

And even your Sahara example is bunk, there are like 10 states within it's borders somehow existing in a barren ecology

Murder laws are to stop the proletariat dwindling their own numbers

Values are emotional not logical, massively reaching with that rebuttal

> I try to keep myself sharp by still manually doing a fair amount of things in my life.

This is an absolute larp. No doubt you use a washing machine and not a washboard. Hand coding in a few years will be like using the washboard when there's a washing machine.

I guarantee trying to save dying species is just an emotional reaction with very little logic behind it. I know it feels sad to see them go, but that's life. We like nothing to suffer, but somebody's gotta be eaten alive from head to toe, right? THATS LIFE

The earth isn't split up into separate "ecosystems" split by continent and land mass you realise? It's one big system that isn't even sealed off from outer space. And in terms of a truly barren planet, the Sahara is teeming with life

Details, bro. Just kill stuff until we feel better about our situation

Isn't an ecosystem an arbitrary area somewhere on the planet? Weather is a massive effect on these so called ecosystems and it is global. You might say there is only one single global ecosystem

In case they delete their own files? Oh heavens save us!

> I also less likely to get hack if i open url link on templeOS

God doesn't believe in the networking stack so you're good

> Because people will shoot themselves in the foot if you give them a shotgun.

Then take away cars as someone could crash and kill themselves with them. What kind of babyified logic is that?

> but no-one knew the explanation.

They called it junk DNA and said it had no purpose, not that they weren't sure. This is the crux of my argument

He called something garbage this year I recall

> The planet is then left to cook in this manner for some centuries.

Such destruction went on to create humanity and all we've achieved. Maybe there is an even smarter species waiting in the wings for the demise of homo sapiens. Your logic is very human centred

How does this rogue AI pay for it's electricity?

Just do what you're paid to do codemonkey and stop arguing

The insane double think of web dev...

They want the benefits of a browser with the capabilities of native code. At some point you have to ask yourself would it not just be easier to do this in a normal programming language.