Another consideration: some apps are locked to the particular device using secure enclave chip so even if you had a full backup of the phone, data, and apps it's possible some apps won't even work on a new phone. You would need to have a second active handset (perhaps the one you retired because the battery was dying?) with some of your apps so a replacement handset for the stolen device can have the ultra-secure app authorized onto the new handset. Right now only one of my apps is this secure but I don't understand why more apps aren't this secure.
> They are a joint venture with VIA which acquired most of Cyrix in 1999
FYI: Zhaoxin (兆芯) [1] is a Joint Venture between VIA Technologies (威盛電子) and the Shanghai Municipal Government. Zhaoxin is mentioned in the article:
"As pointed out in the Phoronix Forums, it could be Zhaoxin. But as they have contributed GCC patches, Glibc patches, Linux kernel patches, etc, over the years it's not clear why they would go unnamed or have to relay the message via Ludloff rather than their prior direct mailing list posts."
> Nabu Casa is now exploring what hardware could replace Home Assistant Yellow, so if you have any suggestions on what we should do next, please tell us in the comments!
How about installing the software on (now) old, minimally specced M1 Mac minis? User Asahi Linux as a base and give my currently decommissioned M1 Mac mini with 8GB of RAM new life!
The fact that a C library can easily be wrapped by just about any language is really useful. We're considering writing a library for generating a UUID (that contains a key and value) for reasons that make sense to us and I proposed writing this in C so we could simply wrap it as a library for all of the languages we use internally rather than having to re-implement it several times. Not sure if we'll actually build this library but if we do it will be in C (I did managed to get the "wrap it for each language" proposal pre-approved).
It is. You can also write it in C++ or Rust and expose a C API+ABI, and then you're distributing a binary library that the OS sees as very similar to a C library.
Occasionally when working in Lua I'd write something low-level in C++, wrap it in C, and then call the C wrapper from Lua. It's extra boilerplate but damn is it nice to have a REPL for your C++ code.
Edit: Because someone else will say it - Rust binary artifacts _are_ kinda big by default. You can compile libstd from scratch on nightly (it's a couple flags) or you can amortize the cost by packing more functions into the same binary, but it is gonna have more fixed overhead than C or C++.
> It is. You can also write it in C++ or Rust and expose a C API+ABI, and then you're distributing a binary library that the OS sees as very similar to a C library.
If I want a "C Library", I want a "C Library" and not some weird abomination that has been surgically grafted to libstdc++ or similar (but be careful of which version as they're not compatible and the name mangling changes and ...).
This isn't theoretical. It's such a pain that the C++ folks started resorting to header-only libraries just to sidestep the nightmare.
This makes me less safe rather than more. Note that there is a substantial double standard here, we could never in the name of safety impose this level of burden from C tooling side because maintainers would rightfully be very upset (even toggling a warning in the default set causes discussions). For the same reason it should be unacceptable to use Rust before this is fixed, but somehow the memory safety absolutists convinced many people that this is more important than everything else. (I also think memory safety is important, but I can't help but thinking that pushing for Rust is more harmful to me than good. )
The link you provided seems light on details. From what I can tell, it sounds like Debian tooling has trouble with packages that are statically linked? It's not clear to me how I'm expected to weigh that against something like memory safety, especially without any more context around how much of this is specific to the tooling Debian uses rather than something inherent to static linking as a whole. Without that, it seems just as reasonable to argue against using Debian until they improve their tooling.
You can expose a C interface from many languages (C++, Rust, C# to name a few that I've personally used). Instead of introducing a new language entirely, it's probably better to write the library in one of the languages you already use.
Last update was 4 years ago; I don't know if this means the project is dead or merely "done." One of the last features added was the ability to share a news item to Hacker News:
I think the general idea is that this isn't a forum for political debate so anything off-topic would get flagged (and the criteria for what is political seems to error on the side of preferring to ban something questionable than to let it go). I realize this can be annoying if the story in question is 95%+ about technology or HN topics but if certain names like Musk or Trump are in the title then it will be flagged. You can call it censorship if you want, but I see it as just keeping the conversations on theme with what HN is.
This is not the same as what you pointed to. This is a reaction from a well known maker about what this might mean, not a press release. Very different content.
I keep expecting them to be acquired by someone... with Microsoft being the most logical acquirer so they can go platform independent and shut down Visual Studio (finally).
Visual Studio still would still be kept on mantainance mode for 10 to 20 years because of there's so much critical enterprise infrastructure that depends on it.
It's a bit harder to acquire a profitable company that isn't publicly traded and wasn't VC funded ( Jetbrains founders turn billionaires without VC help (2020) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25466304 ).
The Federal Reserve Board of Governors is absolutely part of the federal government, and under statute is the same kind of part of the federal government as the FTC is.
The Federal Reserve System is a bit more complicated than the Board of Governors (but is also effectively part of the federal government, but a sui generis, highly corporatist part of the federal government, with direct involvement in an unusual manner by powerful private entities.)
> THe FTC is part of the Federal Gov't whereas the Federal Reserve is not.
I think you know that blanket statements of this type are at best inaccurate and not helpful to the discussion. The Fed is an entity created by federal statute and staffed by presidential appointees, so it's at least a little misleading to say that it's not part of the federal government.
