dataflow

Probably because most of the time you list branches you goal isn't to discover what exists, but to find the specific one you're looking for.

I don't know Zig, but conceptually: a direct pointer is the fastest way to access an object. An arraylist is the fastest dynamic sequence of objects (fattest in access, not in growth). You use these when you need the performance. It's not often but it certainly happens. The most trivial example is a string that you append to but still need to pass to a C API in between that expects it to be contagious, but it's far more useful than just for storing characters.

Anyone else worried that the next president (even Democrat, if they manage to get one) may well let some of the name changes be?

What second-order effects...? Feels like such an oddly opqaue way to talk about them. And how do you ignore the effect of the fact that rent no longer rises during the life of the tenant, making it lower after a while than it would otherwise be...? (How) is it so obvious that that is dwarfed by the second-order effects of uncontrolled rent that it doesn't even warrant a mention? Because it isn't to me.

> Citizens United is a very sound ruling.

> People have a right to support candidates > they can print a sign and stand on a street corner > printing signs costs money > people have a right to spend money supporting candidates.

Individuals printing signage is not where most of the funding is going though, is it?

> People have a right to assemble > they can stand on a street corner with their friends > they can hold a big sign together > they can have lots of friends and form a group and print a really big sign.

This isn't how most of the money is being spent either, is it?

I don't know how you seem to either believe the point of the right to free assembly was to give richer corporations more sway, or be completely oblivious to the fact that that is what's actually getting people angry, not the fact that citizens want to stand with signs by the street corner. Assuming you don't have a conflict of interest leading you to that conclusion, I... don't know what to tell you.

Thanks, that sounds like a nice balance.

Even leaving aside the quantitative stuff (p-values, medians, whatever) and can't crunch the math, IMHO at least you should have seen how statistics can lead you to the exact opposite conclusion from reality, so that you at least know whether to think twice about a conclusion drawn from statistics thrown at you. Yet I was recently quite surprised to learn that even many folks in tech had never encountered Simpson's paradox before. All it takes to start explaining that is a scatterplot and a few lines, and yet it doesn't seem to be taught widely. It's rather terrifying, given that most people (myself often included) will be happy to believe "obvious" conclusions drawn from seeing one percentage greatly exceed another.

I think you're missing what I'm getting at. Yes, I understand that part. But do you seriously think that if TSMC was destroyed right now, China would change its decision to invade Taiwan? Can you imagine what the actual consequences of executing that plan would be?

Let's say they execute that plan. What then? Would it win them anything?

Semi-off-topic, but I have a basic question:

I have exactly one (Windows) machine at home with a decent GPU. I want to run a local LLM on it and let it run various apps on my machine while taking reasonable security precautions. What am I supposed to do, exactly? Migrate all my files to a VM that can I give pass-through CUDA access to the host somehow? Or is firewalling it and remotely controlling it from a second machine the only reasonable way?

Before I dive into the paper: the claim was that some effect was generally accepted, not that a study was performed on it and that it drew a particular conclusion. Is this actually going to establish the former or are we just assuming that the existence of a study implies general acceptance of its conclusion?

> I thought that it was generally accepted by now that homework in the volumes that it is being assigned in the modern day was not found to be beneficial in any significant way in the first place?

Citation needed? I have no clue where you got this from. I hadn't even heard of it as a conjecture, let alone as something anyone accepted, let alone as generally accepted...

To be clear, these folks very specifically refer to the giant amounts, not merely the small ones.

I've seen extremely smart/well-educated people (not in politics or any skin in the game) argue the debt isn't really a problem. "It's not like your household debt" and all. This one probably isn't just about education.

I could see buying multiple copies being useful to mitigate problems, like damage.

But buying all the copies is categorically different and I cannot imagine why they would attempt that, except perhaps to prevent their competition from getting a hold of the same text?

Where did you see they tend to buy all the copies? This comment is the first time I've heard of this.

Can't help but wonder if making it costly for themselves the entire point. So that they can later turn around and bill that distribution fee to the recipient.

I don't think that argument was meant for a court, which is there to deal with existing law. I believe it was meant for what the law should be.

You have oversimplified criteria for diversity.

Can someone explain why in 2026 we have artificial limits like this?

> expandable upto 2TB with microSD

I get that 2TB ought to be enough for everybody, but why the heck shouldn't a 4TB microSD Just Work?

Same story here as your first paragraph. But I can't bring myself to make the switch. Not just because of the pain or changing addresses but also because (among other reasons) payment introduces failure modes that I don't find acceptable. E.g., there should be no payment necessary for me to receive mail at my main address. Physical mail doesn't work that way; it's ridiculous for email to. Email is supposed to be better than physical mail, not worse. Even more so if I'm paying for it.

> who can

Probably enough to keep Windows going, at least.

> and want to

Not if the pay or location is uncompetitive.

From your reply it sounds like you're still voting Republican, just not for the candidates that you classify as "MAGA"? In which case I guess that's a (current) RINO...

Assuming my assumption is correct, I hope you're just recognizing the fact that MAGA didn't get where it is today without massive help from non-MAGA Republicans (in Congress as well as outside), in numerous ways. So you're not going to see the outcome you're waiting for if that's the case.

Is every utilization of CarPlay inside a car performed "while driving"?

Would it be fair to say the blame falls squarely on Github? Why do they even allow pasting of arbitrary strings from a title directly into a script? And if they feel there is a reason, what did they imagine the safe way to do it was?

Not to veer too far off-topic but are former-Republican and RINO mutually exclusive? How can one simultaneously be a Republican (in name or otherwise) while calling themself a former Republican? Either you've stopped voting Republican (in which case you're no longer RINO) or you still are (in which case you're a current Republican)...

I've had the same question for a long time and I suspect the answer is something like "the executive is still the one doing the analysis and making the proposals" - presumably Congress doesn't just allocate with complete disregard for what the executive requests. If the executive requests less then it (usually) gets less. But I'd definitely appreciate a more satisfactory answer.

What does it mean for a phone number, bank card, and IP to "match together to make sense"?

When you say a portion is that more like 1%, 5%, 20%, 50%, or 90%?

Phone in the bed? My phone is not in the bed. It still wakes me up when vibrating.