kbolino

46 ms·

871.
by kbolino 2y ago
I was. There were lots of Apple computers, yes. There were not very many Macs, though. The labs full of IIe and IIgs gave way to PCs, with no era for Macs in between. There were never more than a handful of Macs around at all, and they were
872.
by kbolino 2y ago
Every architecture that survives gets filled with extensions. That's not the issue. Even the time period is not the issue per se, though it plays a part in it. The real dividing line is more like 1985 than 2000 though. CISC is the issu
873.
by kbolino 2y ago
SHA-1 has been broken since 2017. It is considerably more expensive to produce a SHA-1 collision than an MD5 collision, but certainly not impossible. However, BitTorrent v2 also came out in 2017 and uses SHA-256, for which no known collisio
874.
by kbolino 2y ago
I use cut and paste pretty often. Besides giving visual feedback that the operation actually worked, it also makes it easy to move things around, including between files.
875.
by kbolino 2y ago
Though it isn't true in all states, there are onerous requirements for entry in many places. I grew up and went to college in Maryland, and the education program basically takes over your 4-year degree process. Despite enjoying tutor
876.
by kbolino 2y ago
This is the real and hard problem to solve. As far as I know, there are identity-verification services using other, semi-publicly-available data, which can still be spoofed for a lot of people, and some that use just-in-time photography (of
877.
by kbolino 2y ago
You don't need to change the core identifiers. You just need to stop treating (at an institutional and broader system level) mere knowledge of those identifiers alone as sufficient proof of a user's authenticity. For the most part
878.
by kbolino 2y ago
PID 1 has some unique responsibilities. In particular, any process that gets orphaned when its original parent exits is automatically reparented by PID 1, and so the process running as PID 1 must watch for unexpected SIGCHILD and clean up t
879.
by kbolino 2y ago
That "entire point" is already accomplished by the built binary container image, which has a unique identifier in the form of its SHA-256 hash, and can be shared with others easily. A reproducible build is grand, but somewhat tang
880.
by kbolino 2y ago
It is easy to generate mock implementation code (GoMock has mockgen, testify has mockery, etc.) The lack of a hand-rolled mock implementation doesn't mean that much. For example, many people do not like to put generated code under sour
881.
by kbolino 2y ago
I think my comment was clear on the distinction between real and mock implementations. If the code was testable with no need for mocks then certainly remove the interface and devirtualize the method calls.
882.
by kbolino 2y ago
It was based on my own experience (with e.g. sdl2) and, clearly, some ignorance. I didn't mean to imply that cgo was an insurmountable barrier. But apparently it was a big enough deal for the authors of this engine that they copied ove
883.
by kbolino 2y ago
The point of using a mockable interface, even if there's only one real implementation, is to test the behavior of the caller in isolation without also testing the behavior of the callee. This can be overdone of course, not everything n
884.
by kbolino 2y ago
Gamedev in Go will require cgo (and not just the easy parts), which ups the complexity quite a bit, unless you're already very familiar with C. I think it's pretty viable nonetheless, but more for the experienced developer with sp
885.
by kbolino 2y ago
GOMAXPROCS sets the number of live system threads used to run goroutines. The distinction between 50% of time on 10 cores and 100% of time on 5 cores doesn't really matter here: the recommendation is to set GOMAXPROCS=5 in both cases.
886.
by kbolino 2y ago
What people want is that, if cgroup limits prevent a container from using more than M/N of CPU time (N the number of cores), then GOMAXPROCS defaults to M. Ditto other managed language runtimes and their equivalent parameters. However,
887.
by kbolino 2y ago
The OpenJDK folks have quite a long and storied history of trying to do this right and still generally recommend that if you want a JVM to have the right number of CPUs, you should set the relevant parameter yourself (-XX:ActiveProcessorCou
888.
by kbolino 2y ago
As targeted towards young people, YouTube's algorithm serves up a lot more Mr. Beast than Andrew Tate.
889.
by kbolino 2y ago
I'd rather move towards a web (largely) without ads than continue to be the product sold to advertisers rather than the consumer served by the platform. The constant escalation of the ad blocker-ad server war has also contributed great
890.
by kbolino 2y ago
Isn't certificate pinning on the way out? e.g. https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-certificate-pinning-is-outda...
891.
by kbolino 2y ago
The x86 family didn't come out of Bell Labs. It's not a question of where the programming languages came from but of the boundary line between hardware and software.
892.
by kbolino 2y ago
The second half of that question is not relevant if the answer to the first half of the question is "no" (it wasn't rhetorical). QLC "NAND" is not a logic gate, it is a storage mechanism. It does not compute anythin
893.
by kbolino 2y ago
NAND flash is so-named because of its physical resemblance to a NAND gate, but I don't think it actually functions as a NAND gate. Put another way, is it possible to feed two 16-level signals (X and Y) into a QLC and get a 16-level r
894.
by kbolino 2y ago
At least as things stand now, these signals are only used when absolutely necessary, and no real work is done on them directly. Transmitting many bits in parallel was the original way of doing this, and would still be preferred if feasible,
895.
by kbolino 2y ago
Most kernels not written in low-level languages (C, stripped-down unsafe C++, or assembly) were written for special hardware. Such hardware was built to handle a lot of the low-level details so that the software didn't have to. This pa
896.
by kbolino 2y ago
Supposing the cost ramps up exponentially at each phase, e.g. it costs $10 million to get to Phase 1, $100 million to get to Phase 2, and $1 billion to get to Phase 3, then we see the total expenditure for 1000 possible drugs as: $
897.
by kbolino 2y ago
But it's not a purchase. You're not exchanging real goods or services for that money (unless your smoke tests run a lot deeper than mine). Your motives may be benign, but from a legal/regulatory perspective, it's a sus
898.
by kbolino 2y ago
This is my read on it as well, but I'd really like an official clarification. Rare production smoke tests are in a gray area. They may be technical violations but they're allowed to happen as long as they stay infrequent and above
899.
by kbolino 2y ago
I can't find any clarification on this by a search alone. When I went looking for it in the actual services agreement, I couldn't even find any clause about testing at all.
900.
by kbolino 2y ago
Regardless of what developers think, the payment providers generally forbid it. For example, Stripe says: > Don’t use real card details. The Stripe Services Agreement prohibits testing in live mode using real payment method details. Use

More ›