![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/c47230a8-134c-4dc9-89e8-75c6ea875d36.png)
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I wonder how many sites will bother checking for Spanish pornpasses. Seems they’re just playing people and waiting for the inevitable, “Turns out the Internet isn’t respecting our kids, we need to ratchet up the control. We tried to give you a good deal though, right?”
That’s what I said. Free licenses are for free software, while copyleft is for “free software.” Copyleft is because corporations like Xerox will act in bad faith, etc. Free licenses are for free software. Copyleft is for Free Software, The Movement. People aren’t cucks for not deigning to make every piece of code they write part of some statement.
Permissive licenses are truer to the spirit of free software but copyleft, while kind of a copout, seems more pragmatic due to corporations. I wouldn’t avoid copyleft licensing on principle or anything but it feels incongruous to want to make something freely available to all but then nitpick over how they use it.
There are tracing programs that let you see when a program makes system calls to read and write files, control hardware, etc. It might be easiest to run it and see what it does in a VM sandbox. Process Monitor looks like a strace equivalent on windows.
It’s new to me, I think it’s saying that your system is built up by you declaring what you want in a file, a single source that everything comes from.
It’s atomic because each action the system takes is carefully completed rather than bailing out and requiring you to fix something.
It’s immutable meaning you declare how you want things to be set up and then critical changes stem from those declarations and nothing else. You would obviously generate preferences, save data, etc. but the files that make the system / packages work are carefully locked.
It’s like the concept of flatpaks + structured system defining + modern common sense OS operations?
No problem. I’m no guru and I’m currently on Zig but I think learning some Rust is a really fast way to hone skills that are implied by other languages.
S. Korean government is the woman before ~20 seconds, N. Korean government is the woman after that point, and I guess regular citizens are like the people in the diner.
Fighting is one thing, poop is another.
You use lifetimes to annotate parameters and return values in order to tell the compiler about how long things must last for your function to be valid. You can link a specific input with the output, or explicitly separate them. If you don’t give lifetimes the language uses some basic rules to do it for you. If it can’t, eg it’s ambiguous, then it’s a compile error and you need to do it manually.
It’s one of the harder concepts of rust to explain succinctly. But imagine you had a function that took strA and strB, used strB to find a subsection of strA, and then return a slice of strA. That slice is tied to strA. You would use 'a
annotation for strA and the return value, and 'b
for strB.
Rust compiler will detect the lifetime being shorter than expected.
Also, ownership semantics. Think c++ move semantics. Only one person is left with a good value, the previous owners just have garbage data they can’t use anymore. If you created a thing on the heap and then gave it away, you wouldn’t have it anymore to free at the end. If you want to have “multiple owners” then you need ref counting and such, which also stops this problem of premature freeing.
Edit: one more thing: reference rules. You can have many read-only references to a thing, or one mutable reference. Unless you’re doing crazy things, the compiler simply won’t let you have references to a thing, and then via one of those references free that thing, thereby invalidating the other references.
It’s a lot of work making stuff up just to have your spiritual alcohol.
The other day I was trying to disable Ubuntu Pro stuff and the way to do it reminded me of Windows. Once I get my media backed up I’m switching to another distro, just not sure what one yet.
Essentially, they needed a list of things their target audience would eat up. Then they included the minimum amount of content required to say they had those things. (Remember, Trump et al are cheap as hell.)
It’s like an anthology saying, “We have Anne Rice! Stephen King! Issac Asimov!” and then it’s just one novella from each. But the customer just wants a book with those names on the front so it’s fine.
Based on the headline I got the impression that the bible was excluding these two amendments. As in, their absence was jarring in the presence of the other amendments.
The truth is that they left out 17 amendments. Because it’s Trump. It’s aimed at people who don’t care about the Constitution. The customers just want the greatest hits, the big names.
Misleading headline aside, here’s what the they actually omitted (aka here’s a truth which doesn’t leave anything out.)
Can’t sue a state unless you live there.
Structures electing presidents / VPs.
Slavery is banned except when it isn’t.
Born on US soil == you’re 'Merican, Harry.
Suffrage regardless of race.
Taxes.
Structures electing senators.
Prohibition good!
Suffrage regardless of sex.
Specifies length for Presidential / VP terms.
Prohibition bad!
The two term limit for Presidents.
Gives D.C. electors.
You can vote even if you didn’t pay taxes.
Formalized the VP succeeding a dead president.
Voting age set to 18.
That time when Congress took 200 goddamn years to impose a restriction on their salary.
This makes some sense as all foods are salads; sandwiches are untossed salads, tacos are untossed taco salads.
The more you give Israel the greater their scope. It’s completely obvious that you can attempt to limit their ambitions while still allowing them to defend themselves and engage in limited geopolitical maneuvers. They are not going to bet everything on manifest destiny at the expense of self defense and keeping terrorist groups in check. Make Israel have less and they will prioritize accordingly.
Does anyone believe that Iran thought they were going to incinerate Jerusalem, only to be caught off guard that Israel’s allies swooped in to help?
Or that Iran is incapable of working out the effects of their military operations?
“As for evidence, here’s some clickbait thumbnails.”
Whenever I’m making a game that I’ll never finish and that nobody will ever play, I always think about people with one hand, colorblindness, etc. Accessibility seems like a priority whenever you’re making something for the public at large. Of course it’s different when you actually have to finish something. But still.
Is Australia allowed to say what they want? We recently made them coup themselves over military bases, I can’t imagine Australian leaders speaking out against our foreign policy / goals. We’d end their career.