Damn, I guess I’m going to ignore years of evidence that Biden’s admin can function just fine and go with my feelings on this one. I mean would you vote constructively if it meant getting over yourself? Of course not. We’re Americans. We want a leader with a good jaw, not with good character or good ideas.
Nah but seriously though. Biden and Trump make me feel bad so I’m going to vote in a way that harms the country. That’ll show us.
Why does the Superbowl only have two teams? It seems unfair since I don’t know how the two teams were selected and I don’t really care enough to pay attention / find out.
It’s new to me, I think it’s saying that your system is built up by you declaring what you want in a file, a single source that everything comes from.
It’s atomic because each action the system takes is carefully completed rather than bailing out and requiring you to fix something.
It’s immutable meaning you declare how you want things to be set up and then critical changes stem from those declarations and nothing else. You would obviously generate preferences, save data, etc. but the files that make the system / packages work are carefully locked.
It’s like the concept of flatpaks + structured system defining + modern common sense OS operations?
No problem. I’m no guru and I’m currently on Zig but I think learning some Rust is a really fast way to hone skills that are implied by other languages.
You use lifetimes to annotate parameters and return values in order to tell the compiler about how long things must last for your function to be valid. You can link a specific input with the output, or explicitly separate them. If you don’t give lifetimes the language uses some basic rules to do it for you. If it can’t, eg it’s ambiguous, then it’s a compile error and you need to do it manually.
It’s one of the harder concepts of rust to explain succinctly. But imagine you had a function that took strA and strB, used strB to find a subsection of strA, and then return a slice of strA. That slice is tied to strA. You would use 'a annotation for strA and the return value, and 'b for strB.
Rust compiler will detect the lifetime being shorter than expected.
Also, ownership semantics. Think c++ move semantics. Only one person is left with a good value, the previous owners just have garbage data they can’t use anymore. If you created a thing on the heap and then gave it away, you wouldn’t have it anymore to free at the end. If you want to have “multiple owners” then you need ref counting and such, which also stops this problem of premature freeing.
Edit: one more thing: reference rules. You can have many read-only references to a thing, or one mutable reference. Unless you’re doing crazy things, the compiler simply won’t let you have references to a thing, and then via one of those references free that thing, thereby invalidating the other references.
I’m someone who grew up on Windows but switched to Linux and holy shit was it so much nicer. I don’t know if Windows massively improved or if people are just incapable of comparing something new with something they already know. Because Windows is hard.
99/100 basic users need someone to unfuck their windows install after what, one, two years?
Every time you need to do something non standard you’re basically going from training wheels to “good luck, deputy sysadmin.”
Broken registry. Orphaned cruft.
Malware, spyware.
It’s because cigarettes are addicting and so when someone harming themselves says not to do it, it makes sense. They’re suffering from a bad habit / addiction and they’re saying others shouldn’t do it too.
Someone proclaiming the virtues of simple living yet the way they got there being unobtainable for anyone hearing the advice makes no sense.
They’re both hypocrites on the surface but only one survives scrutiny.
You’re supposed to cultivate your critics, get to know them, and use them as barometers. Different critics have different perspectives, goals, and styles.
I think we can all agree that random critiques on the internet don’t typically speak to you personally.
It’s a really satisfying address.
You see, we’re all the same. Nations like Germany which form over extenuating circumstances and which end up expanding at the expense of others… they’re the same as a nation manufactured into existence at the expense of others. A group of people coming together to form a nation is the same as a group of people being deceived so another group of people can be given a nation.
Michael Scott School of Reasoning I guess.
This is for the interstitials right? It’s a separate system than the ones on the side?
Edit: I just went off this: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7403255?hl=en
It sounds like they’re talking about ads in the video.
You can affect the ads by finding normal ads around the internet (served by Google) and telling Google what is and isn’t relevant to you.
However, Google seems to allow advertisers to lie and game their system. Ie PragerU will advertise some “trans is bad” “children’s book” schlock, labeled as “video games.”
When you’re already sucking it up and trying to fairly engage with Google, it’s disheartening to see they don’t even pay attention to what they serve people.
How long are the ads for you?
Here’s a decently monetized channel: https://youtu.be/RQYuyHNLPTQ?si=hyPgA09h5nXISkvy
I got one 15s unskippable, one skippable after 5s.
Here’s a corp channel: https://youtu.be/ikcfhhqdDYI?si=b-mIAY34UfEqZ_AQ
First time I got one 15s unskippable, next time one skippable after 5s.
If I watch things on a friend’s account the ads get much longer.
I honestly answer surveys and have done so for a decade. YouTube doesn’t give me long ads. I can watch hours of YouTube without long, annoying ads. It’s a combination of choosing the correct content (nobody forces anyone to watch aggressively monetized content) and prioritizing results over ego (honestly answering the surveys vs lying on surveys to stick it to Google.)
I don’t care about users that make fragmented, entitled arguments, or who go out of their way to destroy their own UX by trying to sabotage systems. Until we nationalize YouTube and use taxes to fund hosting and moderation, YouTube is pretty great all things considered.
Just my own unpopular opinion.
What I don’t understand about the handlers thing is that when I watch other famous people walking and talking: I see their handlers steer them, give them signals, whisper names in their ear. And you know what? Celebrities in their prime look awkward all the time. People who have nothing to worry about but their craft and being famous screw up all the time.