Google's code of conduct used to be Don't be evil. It was there in Google's IPO prospectus, but dropped subsequently. pparently there have been lawsuits by former employees against Google over thie mott.
27 karma · joined November 27, 2017
“Writing about writer’s block is better than not writing at all.”
And good news: it's been open sourced: https://freecomputerbooks.com/Expert-C-Programming-Deep-C-Se... and its well regarded on Hacker News https://hackernewsbooks.com/book/expert-c-programming-deep-c... .
Whole Language[1] failed so many students, but had significant funding and guru-level support for decades. Brain Gym[2] is regarded as pseudoscience. Even Discovery Learning has had serious detractors.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_language 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_Gym_International
Some ISO 8601 week numbers for CNY:
2022 CNY fell on Feb 1 , which is Week 5
2023 CNY fell on Jan 22, which is Week 3
2024 CNY fell on Feb 10, which is Week 6
2025 CNY fell on Jan 29, which is Week 5
> The whole thing was quite dissapointing. However, I do have a few Raspberry Pico microcontrollers lying around at home. If I could connect to the WiFi network of the energy manager directly and get the data from the server, I could just extract kW consumption from the API, multiply it by a correct rate and then display it on some Grafana instance.
Love it!
On the one hand, CVE and vulnerability databases are excellent, and with some automation of vulnerability and patch availability the's the possibility of automated re-build.
But the manifests can be huge. And some component could be vulnerable, but was never anticipated to be so, and perhaps doesn't even have the means to be patched. Update processes for sub-sub-components may not have been exercised, and could lead to bricked products.
So labelling and guarantees are welcomed. But the challenge is practically insurmountable, and until the entire industry steps up to meet it, labelling and guarantees are going to be 'best effort'.
There's a bunch of stuff consequential to EO 14028 which could allow for some automation of library vulnerability.
But as a tool for stimulating discussion, creating engagement for SETI, or as an exemplar for Fermi Estimation, it's excellent.
Calls per second X seconds per call = no unit.
Call_starts per second X call.seconds per call_start = calls as the unit
Radix sort is O[n] . (or [n * number of bytes in Int] or whatever is being compared).
It's omitted from the comparisons, I see. Radix sort can also have predictable memory overhead.
IMHO it's been incoherent from the earliest times.
The lame exceptions without 'finally', and no consistency in exception types. Then the desperate attempts to make all resources into objects, except that practically no OS calls bothered with this.
The overloading of the shift operators in the standard library. Indeed, operator overloading itself is just a recipe for abuse. You read 'a=b+c' and you literally have no clue what that means.
Multiple inheritance with the brittle semantics.
The awful STL, with its multi-kB error messages (the allocator of the trait of the string of the tree of map of king Caractacus doesn't match ...)
There's no wonder the 'obfuscated C competition' never happened with C++ given the fact it's unreadable, right out of the box.
At some point, processing bitcoin will become uneconomic. It will then be unspendable, and the price will then drop to zero.