jibal

43 ms·

841.
by jibal 10mo ago
That makes no sense. The value of two bytes as a single number is strictly dependent on endianness, and there's no "convention" that can be assumed.
842.
by jibal 10mo ago
These aren't good faith questions.
843.
by jibal 10mo ago
> There is a word for people who cannot tolerate even the smallest difference of opinion: bigots. No, that's not what that word means. > all the same rights could be obtained through a domestic partnership or an out-of-state marr
844.
by jibal 10mo ago
> I mean, I can buy opensource.co.net but that doesn't mean I can tell you how you can use the term. > Need more of a citation to understand that..? This nonsense is not at all relevant to the claim for which I asked for a citati
845.
by jibal 10mo ago
periods are ignored in gmail addresses so there's no difference between firstlast@gmail.com and first.last@gmail.com
846.
by jibal 10mo ago
> I thought that a Gmail account that was first.last@gmail also allowed for email sent to firstlast@gmail (no period) to reach my inbox as well. Yes, and you've received email that was addressed like that ... so what's your iss
847.
by jibal 10mo ago
Love Elinor Merle's snowflake earrings.
848.
by jibal 10mo ago
That summary is more helpful and interesting than a comment whining about it. According to the staff, HN is aimed toward maximizing curiosity--summaries contribute to that, attempts to shut down information because of its source do not.
849.
by jibal 10mo ago
The former ... and yes, we can tell. The fact that it is published in astrobiology is irrelevant--it's been published in many places. "We therefore conclude that Prototaxites was not a fungus, and instead propose it is best assign
850.
by jibal 10mo ago
No.
851.
by jibal 10mo ago
And Nim, which has multiple levels of metaprogramming.
852.
by jibal 10mo ago
> And if that's true, the critics are correct. Volvo should be putting in physical buttons to make safer cars. No one said otherwise. > Instead Same false dichotomy. > Casually window dressing this designer work as a "saf
853.
by jibal 10mo ago
I agree with your dispute with the OP's claim, but your claim that "The treatment of structs as full values that could be assigned and passed to or returned from functions was only introduced in ANSI C, 1989" is simply wrong,
854.
by jibal 10mo ago
According to https://www.nokia.com/bell-labs/about/dennis-m-ritchie/chist... , which is authoritative: > During 1973-1980, the language grew a bit: the type structure gained unsigned, long, union, and enume
855.
by jibal 10mo ago
Non responsive. All of her photos are bad ... this one, catching her moving, actually makes her look better than most. And what photos I've seen of myself is irrelevant, and "your friends deleted them" is dumb ... most of the
856.
by jibal 10mo ago
I quoted the media. The main point in this context is the "rare" part. I'm well aware of the nature of the GOP operatives on the SCOTUS. Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch all voted in Trump's favor. That Beerhead, Ms. IDreamOfG
857.
by jibal 10mo ago
"rare setback"
858.
by jibal 10mo ago
> However, i still think systemic bias is something to be seriously considered. I've seriously considered it. It helps to have been an active editor who understands how the place works and has seen the push and pull that prevents su
859.
by jibal 10mo ago
Of course they didn't provide an example, they just waved their hands. If someone does encounter an example, they are free to correct it by adding sourced material or by removing unsourced material (preferably after a notice on the tal
860.
by jibal 10mo ago
> The person he was responding to was claiming that "literally everyone creating media" is permitted to be used as a source on Wikipedia, which isn't true. It's damned close: https://en.wikipedia.org/w
861.
by jibal 10mo ago
cc'ed to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hopcroft and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Tarjan
862.
by jibal 10mo ago
> You're welcome to think what you want How big of you. > I've had to explain to enough juniors enough times what "open" actually means, so I know what people without any preconceived notions think it means, vs wha
863.
by jibal 10mo ago
This in no way responds to anything I wrote ... perhaps you meant to post it at the top level.
864.
by jibal 10mo ago
I think the low quality of the criticisms of Wikipedia speak to its high quality as a source of information.
865.
by jibal 10mo ago
> There's official narrative being enforced There's no such thing and it's not happening. WP mechanisms don't even allow for "official narratives" to be "enforced". > Literally everything to do
866.
by jibal 10mo ago
This, like most of your claims, is simply wrong. Unreliable sources are unreliable because they are unreliable, not because "there is not enough interest for someone to write a balanced article on it", which is a mass of confused
867.
by jibal 10mo ago
I trust it a lot more than its critics, especially if they say nonsense like "If everyone in the news media is against you or ignores you ..." -- when that happens, the rational conclusion is that you're in the wrong. But in
868.
by jibal 10mo ago
The headline wasn't written by Volvo. Does the font improve safety and is that the motivation, or not? There are comments here like "They should instead focus on their overall software stability and usability", and spankalee
869.
by jibal 10mo ago
Note that I didn't say anything about the 1st Amendment having no limits, nor does the Constitution say that--someone else said that I was "Correct" but put words in my mouth. As for that "shall not be infringed" wo
870.
by jibal 10mo ago
It's certainly not a strawman when it's an oft repeated argument going back to Oliver Wendell Holmes' dictum in Schenck v. United States (and even further, as Holmes didn't invent this argument). The argument doesn'

More ›