onei

Looking at the referenced source which links to their methodology, there's about 75k child sex offenders. 9/10 child sex offenders that are caught aren't on the register. So perhaps the estimate is actually below the real value.

https://nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/nsa-child-sexual-abuse

It won't tell you about malware. It just means when my customers have questions about well publicised vulnerabilities in open source dependencies, they can audit themselves for the presence of that dependency with a set of standard tooling.

That said, my company is moving towards having SBOMs, but seems to be making them available on request only. Which in my mind defeats the point of having them.

In my experience the reverse is true. There are points in Go where you resign yourself to passing around interface{}/any, just because generics can't (yet) do everything you might want. In doing so, you revert to dynamic typing again, albeit in specific circumstances.

From an outsider perspective, it looks hard to label this as anything but insider trading. Is that the wrong take?

Hard to learn does not necessarily equate to hard to read. You don't need to learn to work with Rust's borrow checker to understand a bit of code, but figuring out how to change it might take longer.

As a theoretical exercise, I'm not sure that's strictly true. If you're reliant on donations, then income is never guaranteed. If you suddenly fall short of targets, maybe you have to lay some staff off. But stopping your license fees means you then have to pay someone to switch to an alternative.

Avoiding recurring payments you can't easily stop makes reasonable financial sense to me. Particularly for a business that doesn't sell anything.

I'd treat those price indexes with a pinch of salt, especially the common trade index. They've been left alone for many years and so track items that are perhaps not quite true indicators of inflation.

I never /really/ learned how to use a debugger. I know what one is and know enough to flounder around in one, but I haven't reached for one in a long time.

These days, I work on buzzwords like kubernetes, microservices and Go and I likely couldn't use a debugger for customer issues even if I wanted to. Instead, I rely on a mix of intuition, logs and sometimes blind luck. I wonder if I've accidentally ended up in a domain that isn't that difficult. Or perhaps my luck will run out and I'm going to hit a debugging brick wall some day in the future.

It's less about brand awareness and more about telling customers upfront what it does. If I'm an Akamai customer that's never heard of Linode, maybe I ignore "Akamai Linode" because I've no clue what it does. If I hear "Cloud Computing Services", I know exactly what that offering is likely to entail from the name alone - Compute as a service.

The downside with this approach is that you lose any brand awareness of Linode. Perhaps that's not a terrible thing if their market share was minimal. You could have gone with "Akamai Linode Cloud Computing Services" or "Linode Cloud Computing Services by Akamai". But Linode seems a bit redundant in that name to my eyes.

I think it's less about safe, and more about Rust's other qualities. The language lends itself to writing parsers thanks to its syntax and zero-cost abstractions. Match expressions in particular made parsing a breeze when I last dabbled in writing compilers. The way it makes you think about memory management saves allocations you'd accidentally make in languages with GC. And it probably doesn't hurt that rust/cargo are nice tools that guide developers onto writing similar CLI experiences.

In short, it shines for this problem domain in my experience.

There's [1] for an encyclopaedic overview of the game. For actual gameplay for new players, there's [2]. There's also a mobile game client if you wanted to give the game a go.

1: https://runescape.wiki/w/RuneScape

2: https://runescape.wiki/w/Guide_for_new_players

On the one hand yes. But letting your system be abused by those that have no need for it is never a good use of funds.

Well, it would have been much simpler if Britain had banned encrypted communications during WW2 and Germany had cheerfully complied.

Symbols in Ruby are meant to be more performant that strings iirc. If I have symbol :a, then it's allocated once regardless of how many time it appears. As opposed to "a" which is reallocated every time.

I guess it's similar to Python having a single instance of small integers. PlayStation also experimented with caching small floats which gave them some perf improvements too, but I think wasn't as performant in all cases.

I think you can also do the second in Go with named returns, e.g.

    func sum(nums []int) (result int) {
        for _, n := range nums {
            result += n
        }
    }

No clue if it's an idiomatic usage, and named returns always felt a little too magic for me.

I would guess because nano is meant to be a replacement for pico.

Much to my surprise, I recently found nano was symlinked to pico on macOS. It'd been niggling at me for a while, I'd just assumed I'd been given an older version of nano. Guess I was kind of right.

I'd call it understatement. Rather than write it all off as fabrication, I'm open to believing there's elements of truth mixed in.

I don't believe Noah lived for 1000 years and had 2 of every animal on a boat. But I could believe there was a tsunami that killed thousands. I could also believe it was rationalised as a an act of god and eventually became the great flood that appears in the Bible.

Biblical lifespans seem nice, but only if you wholly believe the stories. Given how often the same stories come up across different civilisations, I'm sceptical they're accurate. For instance, Eve picking an apple is not too dissimilar to Pandora's box. The flood in Noah's lifetime is also part of Babylonian myth where the protagonist was Gilgamesh. I recall even the concept of hell was taken from Greek mythology - notice how we call this mythology today instead of religion.

Answering questions like "where did we come from" and "where are we going" have always existed. Passing knowledge down through generations has always existed. Treating these stories as gospel makes little sense to me.

When I created an account to take out a mortgage with a UK bank, I found they allowed up to 12 ASCII alphanumeric chars for a password. I forget if there was a min length.

This was around October 2019, so it's not like they shouldn't have know better.

Is that strictly true? I know urandom doesn't block if it lacked entropy, but if it had entropy I was under the impression urandom's output was derived from that instead.

Not being aware of how vulnerabilities are detected and despite being a big fan of Rust, I wonder if there are other variables that drive down the ability to find bugs in the short term. If a researcher is only familiar with C and C++, is it possible that they're just ill equipped to find similar bugs in Rust?

I picked the first job that came up [1] and seems like at least one team is using Delphi with Oracle for the database. But the BBC isn't exactly small, so I'm not surprised there's a range.

1: https://www.totaljobs.com/job/senior-software-engineer/bbc-j...

I see them a lot for interns and new grads. I think there's a bunch of templates that have these 'features' and when people are first starting out they don't know better. No interviewer I've ever met thought 5-star ratings were a good idea.

We use 0-based, but we also invented the concept of 0. It's true that multiple civilizations independently invented it, but perhaps an alien civilization never invented it and got along fine without it.

I believe the lack of using Hyper was so they could be more flexible in what nonstandard parts of HTTP they could support, e.g. status codes into the 900s.

Not being a front-end dev, it does seem trivial, but using [0-9\.]* means you can have 1.2.3. You can tighten that regex up, but I imagine that either doesn't fly with mobile keyboard hinting or screen readers trying to hint what a correct value is.

I agree with your overall point, but I think your example might be a bit off.

Boeing also cut corners on quality, hence the issues with the 737 MAX. It's obviously not a direct comparison, but skimping on certain things to get something to market faster is not a uniquely SaaS technique.

If it's just make you're doing that for "make -C mydir" does that and puts you back in the original directory when it's done.

Even if you do have an API, sometimes you have versioning built into that API anyway, e.g. in openapi and gRPC (depending on how you structure your protobuf files). At that point, a date-based version starts looking more reasonable.

Is the code being in a VM mutually exclusive with having homebrew installed?