That is correct. It is cheating, but the judges let a small amount of it slide, especially if you come up with an amusing enough justification. I could not get it to fit otherwise!
I'm not a judge or a competitor, but I feel like a little bit of cheating on the rules is within the spirit of the game. Especially if it a) it makes it more obfuscated and b) it wouldn't have fit otherwise.
Considering that one historical entry (winner maybe?) consisted of a source file that simply contained the character ‘c’, plus a makefile, I’d say it’s in the ball park.
> Always annoyed me that it clearly has 2 wires (power/signal + ground).
Same with "TWI" (Two-Wire Interface) , a name that Atmel (now Microchip) uses for I2C bus. There are 3 wires there (SDA, SCL, ground). Or 4, if you count power.
Right, and that fork is the only version of qmail people still run, and the bug they found was extremely funny given Bernstein's original qmail design (it was, if I remember right, a popen(3) vulnerability --- something that never would have showed up in Bernstein's code, but that's what happens when code gets abandoned, it gets picked up by people who don't really understand it). But it's hard to charge that vulnerability against the original qmail design.
"works fine" and "has some compatibility problems" is a little bit of an oxymoron... I understand what you're trying to say, but that does mean it's essentially unusable, despite "working fine".
"blue benzoquinone has the capacity to act against the bacteria that cause tuberculosis, while the red one is effective against Staphylococcus aureus."
How quaint! Blue colorless molecule is different from the red colorless molecule!
Maybe I shouldn't. But then I have to deep-dive into yet another flagrant cheap hallucination. You see, when a molecule oxidize, it becomes a different molecule.
It is impossible for a benzoquinone to oxidize, yet remain a benzoquinone. There are just two of them [1], and the two are isomers [2]. Transforming one into another would be isomerisation, not oxidation.
Not to mention — "oxidize on contact with air" is such a pile of nonsense. Just look at those things: benzene ring with a couple of oxygens sticking from it. [1] That stuff is pretty darn stable in presence of atmospheric oxygen.
> The cost to run these for me is less than the cost of the cheapest vps (my total requests per month stay under the free tier limit).
I don't think this is a valid argument. Free-tier VPS do exist also.
On the other hand, if you don't trust unattended-upgrades [0], and prefer to spend time poking package manager manually (while at the same time considering that time an expense) - sure, that's a strong argument in favour of using lambda.
Fluoroalkyl chemicals are only "inert and unreactive" in a relatively narrow sense of "wouldn't catch fire", "don't react with strong acids and bases", and similar.
They are plenty reactive in a sense of interacting with enzymes and other cellular machinery.
Not really accurate. These chemicals are quite unreactive. Precursors from manufacturing waste can be very reactive, but most of the problematic contamination regards the forever chemicals themselves, not precursors. This paper is probably the best scientific review of what is going on in the human body. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03043...
Maybe sci-hub has a copy of the full paper. Not sure.
As briefly as possible, and therefore glossing over many many details, the toxic effects are mainly due to cell membrane perturbation, cell membrane transport disruption, and binding to hydrophobic protein cavities (thus disrupting the usual function of these cavities).
GCC says there are a bunch of undefined symbols, first one being "R" right in the beginning:
reply