Chef. n. A person who is not afraid to use more butter than you.

> It is totally plausible but do we really think just in words?

I find that proposition totally implausible. Some people certainly report only thinking in words & having a continuous inner monologue, but I'm not one of them. I think, then I describe my thoughts in words if I'm speaking or writing or thinking about speaking or writing.

Minor nitpick: "pentameter" means 5 parts, and each part is an iamb in iambic pentameter, so it's 5 parts where each part is 2 syllables in a weak-strong pattern. That results in 10 syllables, but "pentameter" doesn't mean 10 syllables alone.

Why not? Anything where user interaction is a primary portion of the site's content is social media. The term "social media" predates algorithmically-driven parasocial feeds, though it does postdate things like BBSes and PHPBB.

C's bit-fields ABI isn't great either. In particular, the order of allocation of bit-fields within a unit and alignment of non-bit-field structure members are implementation defined (6.7.2.1). And bit-fields of types other than `_Bool`, `signed int` and `unsigned int` are extensions to the standard, so that somewhat limits what types can have bitfields.

The CVE system would be greatly improved by a "PoC or GTFO" policy. CVSS would still be trash, but it'd simplify triage to two steps: "is there a proof-of-concept?" and "does it actually work?". Some real vulns would get missed, but the signal:noise ratio of the current system causes real vulns to get missed today so I suspect it'd be a net improvement to security.

Maybe.

But you cannot PoC most hardware and driver related bugs without lots of time and money. Race conditions are very hard to PoC, especially if you need the PoC to actually work on more than one machine.

So while a PoC exploit does mean that a bug is worthy of a CVE, the opposite isn't true. One would overlook tons of security problems just because the discoverer of them wasn't able to get a PoC working. But it could be worth it, to maybe also keep the slop out.

The alternative is to treat all bugs as security bugs, which is valid since they by definition prevent the expected functionality of the program and are thus at least a DoS. This is essentially what Linux does. People don't like this because they often don't care about DoS bugs and it makes the CVE system pretty useless if they only want to see other sorts of security issues.

If I want to participate in a conversation in a language I don't understand I use machine translation. I include a disclaimer that I've used machine translation & hope that gets translated. I also include the input to the machine translator, so that if someone who understands both languages happens to read it they might notice any problems.

You are adding your comments and translating them, thats fine.

If it was just a translation, then that adds no value.

All republics are democracies. Not all democracies are republics. Some people seem to get confused about this and think that "democracy" means "direct democracy" only, and not any of the various sorts of indirect democracy.

To make this point crystal clear, “correcting” someone with “ackshually the US isn’t a democracy” is something poli sci departments break their freshmen of every single year.

The colloquial, broad sense of “democracy” is also how political scientists employ the term in most contexts. That is: the people who study this for a living are entirely OK with that usage. If they didn’t use that sense of the word they’d need another one to mean the same thing, because it’s very useful.

I'll do you one better, it's always been a bureaucracy, but even moreso following the end of the 1960s, after the beginning of the "meritocracy" myth within academia. In reality, the incoming well educated migrants (usually European) in the mid 1950s were extremely nepotistic to their own groups, such as the Irish entering Wall street, and hiring only other Irish stockbrokers, or Italian small business owners in New York. They essentially replaced or married the old money and became a noveau riche that's still in the American status quo to this day. There is a new clique of sorts acting as a nepotistic noveau riche, mostly stemming from South or East Asia. Nepotism affects everyone and everywhere, but it's especially prevalent in the United States.

Also the great entertainment has been declining in quality, and it was always funded directly by the U.S. Government and Military to support their ideologies and agendas abroad. The Koreans are recently doing this to great success, and possibly China as well.

Even the Democratic People's Republic of Korea?

The main problem with toasts is that they disappear with no hope of recovery before you get a chance to read them, obscuring other content in the process. Banners don't obscure other content, don't disappear without user action, and could theoretically have a message history.

You probably misunderstood. C can represent any program's semantics, since it's Turing-complete (modulo finite memory). C can't encode the lifetimes Rust uses, but those get erased during compilation to MIR. This takes MIR from rustc (where borrow checking has been completed and lifetime annotations erased) and outputs C with the same semantics. LLVM doesn't use tokens not produceable by C, but rustc does.

C still has lifetime rules. It just has no syntax for them. What people are bitten with is that they violate the lifetime rules, but their compiler doesn't tell them.

I think it's a reference to certain optimizations possible due to aliasing rules in Rust that are not possible (or maybe only "not straight forward", I'm not sure) in C. So a transpiled program while keeping its semantics might not still compile to equally optimized assembly.

IIRC C can do the same things with correct usage of `restrict`, but that's extremely difficult by hand. So difficult that LLVM's `restrict` support was very buggy when Rust first started using the capabilities. Those bugs got fixed, but it's still impractical to use in handwritten C.