microcow

4 ms·

1.
by microcow 2y ago
Makes me thing of Remi Gaillard's "Speed Cameras" from nine years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqrJ_OY8byY
2.
by microcow 6y ago
I don't think that's accurate: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&ge...
3.
by microcow 6y ago
@mastax, you could model pointer dereferencing as an effect and require dereferencing null pointers to trap.
4.
by microcow 6y ago
I'm not confident about the 2008-present effects of QE, but I think it's more likely to affect stock and bond prices than Baby Boomers retiring. The announcement of the most recent round of QE is one of the "policy shocks&quo
5.
by microcow 6y ago
That's half the story. Apple makes ~10% more this year than last year, but it's more than 2x as valuable as it was a year ago today. The other half of the story is low interest rates/high asset prices. A year ago federal fund
6.
by microcow 6y ago
No! A flawed patch is not the equivalent of "taking a dump" in someone's yard. Proposing a flawed patch is not a contemptuous act, it's not insulting, and it is not injurious. Treating it as such is the problem. Telling
7.
by microcow 6y ago
> It is now widely recognized that this attempt to define the semantics of data races has failed, and the Java memory model is broken (I’m citing Hans Boehm here). This is a bit misleading. C++ also ended up defining the semantics of dat
8.
by microcow 6y ago
It's degrading ("toxic") to tell a contributor they don't belong in kernel development with comments like the above and the follow-up: "...you really disqualify yourself from kernel work. Please really just go away
9.
by microcow 6y ago
It seems reasonable to reject the patch for technical and legal reasons, but it's pretty disappointing to see toxic comments from prominent kernel developers like: > "Seriously? If you only even considered this is something re