FWIW, I really like the way C# has approached this need... most usage is exposed via attribute declaration/declaration DllImport for P/Invoke. Contrasted with say JNI in Java or even the Go syntax. The only thing that might be a significant improvement would be an array/vector of lookup names for the library on the system given how specific versions are often tagged in Linux vs Windows.
People can be strange or bizarre if they want too but they have to understand it means some people won't like them, especially if their shtick is deliberately making people uncomfortable and being annoying.
> I do not understand the desire for everybody else in the world to act exactly like you. Variety is the spice of life.
I don't want people to act exactly like me. I greatly appreciate the existence of people different from me with differing points of view and differing nations with differing cultures. This doesn't mean I have to like one specific archetype that I feel acts obnoxiously.
The author quite literally mentions that part of their motivation to do things is to make people want them to stop, not to mention the deliberate and conscious choice to write the article in lowercase.
It's also natural to be uncomfortable because of the various references to sexual fetishes throughout the article.
in the sense of "writing a brainfuck compiler in ed," not in making them so uncomfortable they beg for release. plus, "feminization" is not a fetish, at least in the sense of making rustc say "i love you;" that feels incredibly uncharitable.
i was being charitable, not obtuse. a great number of my closest friends are trans; no element of their experience as i observe it fetishizes the very concept of transition, and those who've spoken to me about it are quite opposed to the "pornification" (as opposed to even sexualization) of trans people (particularly women) by the community itself, and others. if you're at all curious, i thought [0] was pretty informative.
all that to say, trans people (or anyone) shouldn't need to qualify their position (or very lighthearted, energetic opinion piece) with some genericizing disclaimer as to their identity, intents, etc., on the very basis of their identity. live and let live (i.e. fuck off)
"feminizing" doesn't refer to a sexual fetish, it just means making something more feminine. Do you assume that something being feminine is automatically sexualized and fetishistic?
"Feminizing" doesn't inherently refer to a sexual fetish but context matters. I invite you to examine the article more in depth, look at the chatroom conversations and then come to your own conclusion.
Almost every even half decent CPU made in the last decade does have TPM 2.0, albeit for some strange reason OEMs used to ship with it disabled. You may be able to turn it on in the bios.
This is a massive pet peeve of mine as well. As far as I'm aware there's not a single consumer CPU listed in the Windows 11 compatibility list that doesn't have builtin TPM2.0.
That study only says that most Americans think they interact with AI at least a few times a week (it doesn't say how or if it's intentional). And it also says the vast majority feel they have little or no control over whether AI is used in the lives.
For example, someone getting a google search result containing an AI response is technically interacting with AI but not necessarily making use of its response or even wanting to see it in the first place. Or perhaps someone suspects their insurance premiums were decided by AI (whether that's true or not). Or customer service that requires you go through a chat bot before you get real service.
Which can be trivially mapped to directories for aliasing. Just like Linux.
Windows NT and UNIX are much more similar than many people realize; Windows NT just has a giant pile of Dos/Win9x compatibility baked on top hiding how great the core kernel design actually is.
In the end, if you think about it, the Win32 subsystem running on top of NT OSes it's pretty much the same concept as Wine running on Unix. That's why Wine is not an emulator. And neither is XP emulating old Win32 stuff to run Win9x binaries.
They're using slide rule users as a stand-in for serious mathematician as opposed to people who incidentally use mathematics. It makes some sense in historical context but becomes a bit anachronistic after the invention of electronic calculators.
Tbh, the rights and wrongs aside, I suspect "everyone" is complaining about it because it's the easiest thing to talk about. Much like how feature discussions tend towards bikeshedding.
That's an entirely different issue. The kb's of overhead for backtrace printing and the format machinery is fixed and does not grow with the binary size. All combined it wouldn't account for anywhere close to 1mb let alone 100's of mb.
reply