lolikoisuru

7 ms·

1.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
You could just like you know, start up a mumble client and test it yourself.
2.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
>Not too sure on the privacy front. I don't believe they sell any user data, yet. Oh please. The CEO's last company got sued for that and this time he made sure to make it obvious in the ToS.
3.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
>I don't know how or to whom they are going to sell my data yet You do know though, absolutely everyone. Read their ToS and they make it pretty obvious.
4.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
> Signatures for OS or package updates > lack state or any notion of a keyring And thus being completely useless for the purpose. This is quite a fundamental misunderstanding of the use case.
5.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
The only thing one should gather from these threads is that mos people on this site are completely incapable of using the shell and are too lazy to learn it.
6.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
It defines a function : that launches two copies of itself in the background. Then it calls that function. bomb() { bomb | bomb & }; bomb
7.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
>Bash has a huge number of little shortcuts that are difficult to learn. [snip] it is difficult to Google for its meaning Everything you could ever ask for is in the manual and also in the man page. RTFM: https://www.gnu.org&#
8.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
C is not a product unlike everything you mentioned. Even most programming languages are products these days.
9.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
>In the past, academic computer science was useless but practical programmers were good. At least here in Finland I doubt anyone will even notice the difference.
10.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
>why write tests? why improve ux or ui? why help with documentation? Because these actually improve the project.
11.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
>Compared to other discussion boards, I usually find HN threads are far more thoughtful and less antagonistic. You realize this is because HN shadowbans people whose opinions don't fit the crowd, right?
12.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
>Nazi ideology is explicitly about fucking with others. It's about building a national socialist state. Some people might feel that it's the best way to organize large number of people. Just because they hold that view doesn&#x
13.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
You basically said that you're pro free speech unless you disagree with said speech. It's quite apparent that you actually aren't pro freedom of speech.
14.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
>I don't think everyone I disagree is a Nazi. Just everyone who values freedom of speech then? >so many people invoking it are doing so in bad faith. You really think people who support freedom of speech are doing so in bad faith
15.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
You say that as if supporting free speech was somehow part of the nazi platform.
16.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
The default info pager is pretty horrible. I would recommend installing pinfo (usually available in official repos) which is an info pager with user interace similiar to lynx.
17.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
>[0] Except for the backtick as opening quote. Objectively, I think this is a good design decision for any language, but it takes a lot of getting used to. The `quoting' in m4 is pretty nice since it makes the quotes easy to nest. S
18.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
> I briefly was maintaining my blog using make and M4. I also wrote a static blog generator with M4 and GNU Make recently. It was the second time I've used M4 and it was pretty great. The first was a templating (probably missusing
19.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
I recently started reading the book and when I got to the first dialog part I got incredibly annoyed at how childish and unnatural the writing was. I've yet to see why people think this book is so life changing.
20.
by lolikoisuru 8y ago
> who turned out to be not such a cool guy. Only if you believe anonymous smear campaigns. None of the alleged victims ever made any effort to start a proper investigation and one of the claimed victims (some of the stories were written
21.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
So in your mind the difference between AI (which you define very loosely) and any other program is just the scope and complexity. >Lot of software can indeed be classified as (very weak) AI, because it makes decisions in service of a goa
22.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
>I agree, there is nothing intelligent about an ABS system, and nobody is labeling it as intelligent. Artificial intelligence is intelligence, just made artificially instead of organically. You clearly have no understanding of the term s
23.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
>The definition of artificial intelligence is the ability to perform a task that would normally require human intelligence. Do you have any specific sources that define it as that? >An ABS system would fit into this definition as it i
24.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
What definition of AI do you use that would qualify ABS as an AI but wouldn't also include majority of all software ever written?
25.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
By this definition almost all software would be an AI. Making decisions or reacting to stimuli does not necessarily require any form of intelligence. You probably meant automation instead of "AI".
26.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
Keep in mind that this is lossy compression. The following examples demonstrate the benefits and disadvantages of the current iteration of this aggressive space saving lossy transformation strategy. In many cases, optimization wit
27.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
We've picked up some unusual traffic from your network and have temporarily blocked access from your IP address. Literally never visite the whole site.
28.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
FYI PXE booting has been possible for a while now: https://www.raspberrypi.org/documentation/hardware/raspberry...
29.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
>So I'm supposed to define the function with each invocation? Geez if only programming language designers had come up with a way to bring code from other files. They could call it "include" or something like that. But that
30.
by lolikoisuru 9y ago
>This is about combining a cryptic shell language with a lousy build system macro syntax and semantics. Get over the shell part. You don't have to use Unix shells. >As I wrote many times, I do actually know Make and have read muc

More ›