Types are not implicit, they're inferred by the compiler when there is no ambiguity about what the type needs to be. This is a huge benefit for refactoring code and reducing maintenance. I acknowledge that sometimes you might care to know the exact type of the variable, and sometimes that's not as easy for a human to infer as it is for the compiler, but every decent IDE will provide inline type hints for you. Interpreting code by reading it in plaintext is an exercise in masochism.

Python is actually the opposite on this, and it's one of Python's worst characteristics. The type is unknown until runtime unless you annotate it, and then the annotation isn't really enforced. It's the worst of every dimension.

C++11 introduced auto, and now the community is split between "almost always auto" and "never auto".

JavaScript needed a whole new compiled language (Typescript) to fix its type system problems, and Typescript is only an incremental improvement at best.

Rust has the best type system of any modern language by far. If you're tripped up by not always seeing the type declarations then you're either focusing on the wrong details in the code or you just need a little more practice. The key thing that needs to sink in for new Rust users is that the compiler is always providing safety rails. That means it's no longer your job to verify that every aspect of the code is correct. You can relax a little and actually have something akin to duck typing without all the pitfalls that usually come with it.

I think it's important to put it in context: the Democrats are hemorrhaging support from their base who thinks they should be doing more to resist this administration. That does not mean they are losing support in favor of Republicans.

Meanwhile Trump is only losing a tiny amount of support because his base is a cult of personality that worships him. They won't turn against him until he's hurting them so directly that they can't rationalize it as somehow being Obama's fault. But many of them are delusional enough that they will never abandon their fealty so matter how much he harms them.

There have been articles out there for multiple days now which spell out your same conclusion, but these CNN clowns keep pushing the same false narrative. It's blatantly intentional misdirection at this point.

It's a massive win, and I would question the credibility of any systems programmer that doesn't recognize that as soon as they understand the wrapper arrangement. I would have to assume that such people are going around making egregious errors in how they're using mutexes in their C-like code, and are the reason Rust is such an important language to roll out everywhere.

The only time I've ever needed a Mutex<()> so far with Rust is when I had to interop with a C library which itself was not thread safe (unprotected use of global variables), so I needed to lock the placeholder mutex each time I called one of the C functions.

I actually remember her being a standout at the debates until Tulsi Gabbard managed to latch onto a line of attack that hurt her credibility as the progressive candidate that she was presenting herself as. Shortly after that traction was lost I think she saw the writing on the wall and exited gracefully, which obviously worked in her favor because it made it easy for Biden to tap her for VP.

If an HBO dark sitcom had a character that's exactly like Nick Fuentes, audiences would complain that he's too much of an over the top parody to be a believable character.

I think the point is that Republicans detest the idea of being weird no matter what, so they would rage at the suggestion of being a good weird anyway. To them "good weird" is an oxymoron, even though they are actually very weird and not in any kind of good way.

Everything you're saying really just supports the fact that the nations of the time were handling the situation in a wildly immoral way, and the creation of Israel as an ethnostate was part and parcel of that immorality, and remains highly consequential to this date.

There's no point asking me as an individual how I would personally have solved the crisis if I could travel back in time, because one person can't unilaterally force a nation to do anything without being a dictator, and people don't become dictators without doing horrible things.

What matters is recognizing that the Israel of today came to exist out of two factors:

1. Wealthy and influential Zionists wanted to claim Palestinian land by any means possible to further enrich themselves.
2. Other nations wanted somewhere to send as many Jewish people as possible because they were antisemitic and didn't like refugees.

Now we're stuck dealing with the consequences of our idiot racist ancestors. Let's just try our best to not be overtly idiotic or racist ourselves (racist, for example, by turning a blind eye to the genocide happening to Palestinians, as if they're not even human beings, or idiotic by thinking that there's any justification for Israel's insanely disproportionate use of force).

Just to be clear, I'm not accusing you specifically of being racist or idiotic, I'm just describing my general position on things.

Yeah that's my big takeaway here: If the people who are rolling out this technology cannot make these assurances then the technology has no right to exist.

And you HAVE TO eat it.

The non-human animals aren't in a position where consent (or lack thereof) can be accounted for. They aren't neurologically able to comprehend the consequences of their activities or the detriment it brings about when they follow their instincts. They also don't comprehend that the operation will make parenthood impossible, so they're not left to suffer from any mental trauma or sense of loss afterwards.

And if all that isn't enough, there just isn't a viable alternative for controlling the domestic animal population: We can't educate the animals to let them make informed decisions. We can't get them to use contraceptives. We can't convince or trick them to stop having sex. We also don't have the means to keep them all contained, and in any case that would be far more detrimental to their mental and emotional health than being neutered.

You have that totally backwards.

The board (which is the board of the non-profit) wanted the company to be more focused on its mission and less profit-driven. Altman is the one that's been letting Microsoft get its tendrils around OpenAI and push a narrative that everything must be closed off and profit focused.