I’ve a couple of GP friend who used to describe “Dr Google” as their online colleague.
The point being, they were somewhat trained in interpreting risk as opposed to the stereotypical googler-of-symptoms. Once upon a time search engines were quite useful.
The neighbours’ seven-year-old suggested using a VPN to get around age checks. I don’t know if he knows what one is, but he’s definitely seen adverts for them.
I kind of expected a lot of this; I remember the sendmail 4 book from back in the day when O’Reilly had that, DNS and BIND, and Perl as the entirety of its corpus.
I’m surprised their response wasn’t, “you’re all on the side of predators; it’s as simple as that”.
Even the standard formulation of newtonian dynamics admits nondeterminism. (This requires a non-Lipschitz setup to work; and in any case it doesn’t describe the world we live in. Also it’s a mathematical description, not the real thing.)
I’m not quite sure why you fetishise a bit-for-bit over semantic equivalence. Doesn’t it turn “it works on my machine” into "it works on my machine as long as it has this sha: … "?
Some of the GoF patterns over-emphasise inheritance, but by-and-large, you don’t build large systems without either using or rediscovering software patterns, whether they’re OO, FP, or what-have-you.
No, it didn’t.
The point of Java is to be a language for 90% of programmers. The vast majority of software development is not sexy, doesn’t require a PhD. Java was intended to be a commoditising language and in that it succeeded wildly.
Accept all, one click. Accept only necessary: typically involves turning somersaults.
The ruling is about the latter.
Yeah, I think they were thinking of a barrel-roll.
With massive OOO pipelines, what’s the alternative?
What precisely is your interpretation of Falkner’s assertion that trans people should lobby for a “third place”?
I’m not sure if that opening sentence is fatuous or not. What errors in any industrial enterprise are not human in origin?
That’s actually the idea. It’s not general precrime, it’s a decision support tool for predicting recidivism when deciding parole cases.
That doesn’t mean it’s not on decidedly shonky ground statistically speaking.
570 recorded homicides between March 2023 and 2024.
Data on “hundreds of thousands” of people can’t provide the distinguishing markers to even have a stab at this.
It can reliably predict when people are black, though.
And as for your specific question: typechecked code doesn’t get to production with a type error; it won’t compile. There’s a common phrase, “left-shifting errors”. It means catching bugs as early in the development cycle as possible. In terms of things like developer time (and patience), it’s far more cost-effective to do so.
I worked on OpenStack back in the day: millions of lines of untyped Python.
Let’s say you’ve got an X509 certificate. You know you can probably pull the subject out of it - how? Were I using Java (for instance), the types would guide my IDE and make the whole thing discoverable. The prevalent wisdom at the time was that the repl was your friend. “Simply” instantiate an object in the repl then poke at it a bit.
And it’s not just that kind of usability barrier. “Where is this used?” is a fantastic IDE tool for rapid code comprehension. It’s essentially impossible to answer for a large Python codebase.
Don’t get me wrong: python is still a great go-to tool for glue and handy cli tools. For large software projects, the absence of type enforcement is a major impediment to navigation, comprehension and speed of iteration.
The issue here is that the author of that post, and potentially the fictional author of the thing being lampooned, are not drawing a distinction between a tutorial (or an explanation) and a how-to.
https://diataxis.fr/
Either you want to get a task done, or you want to spend a lot longer learning how to work that out for yourself.
(Many tutorials will include small set of how-to-like instructions because emulating the actions of a master will improve one’s vocabulary of what can be done as well as how it is achieved.)