What did he whisper in her ear?

He gave them the weapons and is STILL giving them weapons today knowing exactly how they’re being used. “We’re trying to hard to stop this” while handing them the bombs they need to continue uninterrupted.

After watching Pocahontas for the first time in many years, it shocked me that anyone could value personal wealth over coexisting. The antagonist only cares about mining out gold, looking at the hills as having potential as opposed to perceiving them as implicitly valuable as they are. Nature is worth protecting.

Oh, okay. Thank you for clarifying. So doesn’t that mean we should never have a compiler written in the same language that it compiles? Why would we ever choose to make the mistake of using the same language? Is it ever not a mistake?

Why would a Rust compiler written in C be more trustworthy than one written in Rust?

If the idea is that, in an ideal world, we would compile each layer of compilers from assembly-up-to-Rust for each build, that seems even more risky as then you have to trust each compiler instead of just one.

I’m still lost on why they’re doing it.

The idea that someone would introduce the verbiage “garbage collection” in the context of Rust is crazy to me. I hope they change that to “file cleanup” or… anything else.

AI is surprisingly helpful with providing a starting point. When you want a helloworld app, an example of how to use some part of a crate, or a code snippet showing how to take what you have and do something unusual with it, AI is super useful.

I would love to be able to get the same quality of AI locally as I do from ChatGPT. If that’s possible, please let me know. I’ve got two 3090s ready to go.

But for now, I’m just enjoying the fact that ChatGPT is free. Once they put up a pay wall, it’s back to suffering (or maybe/probably trying out some open-source models).

There are some people who both start and end every gun debate with the “good guy with a gun” argument. Nothing gets through the impenetrable logic of “it makes sense to me”.

This comment would make sense if he hadn’t stated that the PR was politically biased but had instead said that it was unnecessary or that it would be inconsistent with the vast majority of the documentation. I’m just reading what he said. He claimed it was a PR based on politics, not language norms or historical norms. Only certain kinds of conservatives view gender-inclusive language as a political issue.

I appreciate that you don’t want to see this person as a hateful bigot and I don’t think he is either. Most people I’ve encountered that share the same reaction as him have basically been tainted by conservative influences, like media or parents, but they don’t have any real hate for trans people in their hearts. They’ve associated the idea of gender-inclusivity as being political and moved on with their lives, accepting the framing and narratives around the topic.

It’s a reference to this: https://github.com/SerenityOS/serenity/pull/6814#issuecomment-830793992

They have a phobia of making changes that are valid if they perceive the change to be motivated by politics. In the example above, the PR is denied because they have been convinced that the PR is about accommodating trans people. The existence of trans people and accommodating them via grammar is political for certain kinds of conservatives. The irony is that their own political beliefs are affecting their ability to distinguish a valid change from a politically-motivated one.

If she says “You didn’t ‘lock her up’ like you promised” he’ll just turn it around on her and claim that she should be locked up. Chats of “lock her up!” will begin as they completely ignore anything negative said about him.

I don’t know how to get everyone I know to really understand this. Every time I bring it up in conversation, the other person just puts their hands up and explains that they’re powerless to address it, so it’s not even worth talking about. I don’t know how to respond to the apathy.

Oh, I thought that the temp files were named by the user. If that’s not the case, that these are not databases created specifically by McAfee in the temp directory, then I’m not sure what the appropriate solution should be. Obscuring the file type and how the file is used from users is still a bad practice.

I love how the solution didn’t involve changing the prefix to “mcaffee_”. Now users don’t know who to blame. Great. That’s so nice of them.

Yesterday doing a search using vim for a class that shared a lot of characters at the front with many other classes: /Bas.*Some I could have done a more precise search with better regex, but this was quick, easy, and worked.

I personally think that unwrap and the question mark operator were a mistake.

It’s time that we admit to deaf people that music isn’t real. The joke has gone too far.

Your team needs to have a coding standards meeting where you can describe the pros and cons of each approach. You guys shouldn’t be wasting time during PR reviews on the same argument. When that happens to me, it just feels like such a waste of time.

How does it handle multiple potential outcomes? Example: unformat!("a {} b {} c", "a x b b y c") Would it return Some(("x b", "y")) or Some(("x", "b y"))?