Groxx

56 ms·

841.
by Groxx 1y ago
I've also generally found that separating the types passively reminds people that they are not forced to keep those types the same. Whenever I've been in codebases with externally-controlled types as their internal types, almost
842.
by Groxx 1y ago
That seems rather easy? There's still plenty of safety. It's not an `unsafe` trick or worse, you still have bounds checking and safe concurrency and well-defined behavior, and you can trivially guarantee that (while mutating the
843.
by Groxx 1y ago
They can't write concurrently, but generally speaking yes, they can: https://sqlite.org/faq.html#q5 Your throughput will be much worse than a single process, but it's possible, and sometimes convenient. Maybe som
844.
by Groxx 1y ago
Far too late to edit now, but I got a laugh out of the autocorrect "pheasant" at least
845.
by Groxx 1y ago
As opposed to now, where you've got someone who is willing and able to tank the entire project, but it looks good on paper? Is that the kind of person you want to be competing for? I get what you're saying, but I really can&#
846.
by Groxx 1y ago
tbh I don't think "researches language structure" has much at all of a correlation with "uses language in a pheasant manner". it happens to with Tolkein. but it's kinda like claiming a compiler optimization s
847.
by Groxx 1y ago
If they're in it for the money, instead of the mission, then I say good riddance. That's how we get where we are now. 2-3x staff engineer pay is a LOT of money. More than enough.
848.
by Groxx 1y ago
The same thing that happens if the notified process dies suddenly. If you're not handling that, then whatever you're doing is unreliable either way.
849.
by Groxx 1y ago
It seems to be pretty explicit that the "program" being run contains the full hashing algorithm used (to output the correct answers most of the time) plus additional logic to allow cheating. That rather clearly goes wildly bey
850.
by Groxx 1y ago
Anyone who has used these kinds of systems will have encountered tons of cases where those test systems weren't enough, so they use real purchases too The test systems are broadly good and worth using, but no. Everyone uses real purc
851.
by Groxx 1y ago
Global use looks fine - it's a very-simply-used sync pool to do larger blocks of rand reads, which makes plenty of sense for performance. Unsafe use also looks fine, values either don't escape the function (a type string->byte
852.
by Groxx 1y ago
With part of the problem being that it's literally impossible to sanitize LLM input, not just difficult. So if you have these capabilities at all, you can expect to always be vulnerable.
853.
by Groxx 1y ago
No, it's long, long gone. When I did it, the script was a bit of a mess of trigger setup, and then a backfill that only monitored replica lag , as if the status of the much less heavily used failover instance was somehow the most im
854.
by Groxx 1y ago
Ha, a site I worked on hit this limit for the "follow relationships" table - had to build a new compound key table to migrate to, with triggers to dual read/write, to unbreak everything. In a few hours of "wtf" -&gt
855.
by Groxx 1y ago
Also next to impossible to write down to give to someone else. This (or by phone) is how I've transferred: all family accounts, all small community accounts, some business accounts, many friend-shared accounts, and it's also how s
856.
by Groxx 1y ago
if you have multiple files that are read in a function, and they might lead to different error handling... then sometimes yeah, perhaps they should be different types so you are guaranteed to know that this is a possibility, and can choose
857.
by Groxx 1y ago
Oracle defends their properties whether it makes sense or not. That is what the machine does.
858.
by Groxx 1y ago
Already doing that, they don't really have a choice. I still have to deal with the awful UX they've chosen to inflict on everyone by "valuing our privacy by selling our info to over 100 companies", and they can still sel
859.
by Groxx 1y ago
> We value your privacy > ... Together with our 173 trusted partners... In a full screen, multi-stage permissions pop-up. Yeah how about no. No need to lie, tell me how you really feel, maybe "we will sell anything we can to a
860.
by Groxx 1y ago
Yeah, I deal with multiple Go projects that take a couple minutes to link the final binary, much less build all the intermediates. Compilation speed depends on what you do with a language. "Fast" is not an absolute, and for most p
861.
by Groxx 1y ago
"Same Sizer" is exactly how I feel about justified text
862.
by Groxx 1y ago
It is a legally untested take
863.
by Groxx 1y ago
By far the largest review-effort PRs of my career have been in the past year, due to mid-sized LLM-built features. Multiple rounds of other signoffs saying "lgtm" with only minor style comments only for me to finally read it and
864.
by Groxx 1y ago
There is an enormous amount of space between "it must be written in lua for safety" and "leftpad can upload your entire hard drive and then ransom it back to you". Right now we have the latter.
865.
by Groxx 1y ago
It is beyond madness and well into "intentionally negligent" to release a plugin system without a permissions model in, like, the last 20 years. Can't believe people aren't up in arms about how wide open vscode and simil
866.
by Groxx 1y ago
Ah, yep, you're correct - I was misinterpreting the pictures in the paper. On rereading, they seem pretty clear about it being paint on the outside that somehow gets on the inner surface. Though also: > The results show that glass
867.
by Groxx 1y ago
uh. yes? it's far from uncommon, and sometimes it's ludicrously wrong. Grammarly has been getting quite a lot of meme-content lately showing stuff like that. it is of course mostly very good at it, but it's very far from
868.
by Groxx 1y ago
Not sure we can conclude much there tbh, their own numbers and the numbers in other studies they mention show truly enormous ranges for their rather small sample sizes. Plus, if they're right and the contamination is mostly coming f
869.
by Groxx 1y ago
On rereading the thread, maybe I'm just misreading? I read your question as "they're popular, why do people think they are not" but you could also have meant "why doesn't anyone want them". For the latter:
870.
by Groxx 1y ago
Making changes to ultra-core stuff like glibc is not really a "move fast and break things" area.

More ›