The most ardent religious adherents insist that atheists have no morals. They have no idea what they're talking about. The truth is that they listen intently to an atheist with no morals every time to go to church.
I'm surprised Trump and Musk aren't up in arms about the "car body count". "Won't somebody think of the children... We want to put to work--on overnight shifts, on school nights--making cars like this!"
If you wanted stability you shouldn't have backed Trump!
Did they learn nothing from his last term in office? Actually, we know the answer to that (no, they did not).
Now I'm beginning to wonder if big, evil corp executives are just as gullible as the rest of the MAGA crowd that regularly vote against their own interests 🤔
DOGE seems to be really good at generating government waste.
"That is not language President Trump has used to describe Kamala, and it's not how the campaign would characterize her."
The most interesting thing about this statement is they have set Trump up to fail. Because you know he's going to say that into a microphone at some point during this campaign.
US has a neverending supply of communists, tankies, LGBT activists, weird religious cults and so on.
That's called Freedom of Speech. Every country has these things it's just that in some countries they face (legal or just plain authoritarian oppression style) retaliation for speaking out.
I'm an atheist and certainly not a Tankie but I respect the right of religious nuts and Tankies to proudly proclaim their foolishness. I do not respect the right of bots to do this though. Automations have no rights and should not be allowed to impersonate people in order to spread propaganda.
We need an international treaty where every country agrees to make it illegal for bots to operate online without declaring themselves as such (bots). Then at least we could still have useful bots and have an excuse to ban the fakes and punish those that utilize them to push propaganda (as hard as that may be).
Yes but only in Windows land do you see jillions of (proprietary) drivers made by 3rd parties. Many of which self-update.
It's a common thing among fascists. Nazis have been getting tattoos of Hitler since forever, Roger Stone has a tattoo of Nixon on his back, etc.
To be fair, that's a very open ended question. I mean, what kind of bolt are we talking about? A standard lag bolt? If so you don't tighten it! That'd be a trick question! You tighten the nut. Same thing applies with car wheel bolts. Tricky tricky!
Is it a hex bolt that also has a cross head? How tight are we talking?
I'm just going to assume bolts of lightning and Usain Bolt are off the table.
When you call player.move() are you mutating the state of player or are you really just logically attaching the move() function to the player object in order to keep your code... Logical?
player could actually be an interface to some object in an external database and move() could be changing a value in that database. Or player could just be a convenient name and place for a collection of "player"-related functions or stranger (yet weirdly common): A workaround for implementing certain programming patterns (Java and C#, I'm looking at you haha).
In Rust, attaching a function or property is something you do to structs or enums. It carries a very specific meaning that's much more precise and IMHO more in line with the original ideals of OOP (what they were trying to accomplish) and I think the way it's implemented (with traits) makes it far more flexible.
You can define a trait that requires a bunch of types/functions and then any implementation (impl) of a struct or enum that includes them can be said to support that trait. This allows you to write type-safe code that will work in zillions more situations and across many different architectures than you could with traditional OOP languages like C++ or Java.
It's the reason why embedded rust is kind of taking the world by storm right now... You really can "write once, run everywhere" thanks to careful forethought from the Rust developers and embedded-hal.
To be fair, sharks have the statistical advantage of not being where humans are almost all of the time.
riskable
0 post score0 comment score
A president that doesn't believe in civil rights and due process deserves neither.