Over 50% approval rating.

Higher than the leader of many other countries, like, er, USA.

Despite my drive-by shitposts in the rest of this thread I want to make a serious point here.

There’s a large part of software engineering that thinks languages are chosen based on the problem, as a tool for a job.

They aren’t. They’re chosen based on the team, on how well the team knows and can use the tool. On how many people can be hired with the knowledge of the tool to work immediately.

Sometimes, even if the team knows C well, there can be a problem so different it’s worth using another tool. say python for some testing scripts on a C project.

But rust and C are too similar for this to apply. If you want rust to be used for the kernel you have to push for it to be more well known and used, so more Devs come into teams already knowing it well. Anyone agreeing to work on a team using rust is making a career decision that will be stay on their CV forever and you need them to feel good about this, that it will give them more opportunity in future.

It’ll take 20+ years because that’s how long legacy code is often maintained for and we already have 20+ years of future legacy code for C teams to deal with. We’re all making more future legacy C code than future legacy rust code too.

I’m trapped in C++ so I’m doomed but good luck C and Rust coders.

C++ is a semi automatic shotgun with 200 barrels pointing in all directions.

It owns too much of Africa to be a regional power. It’s a superpower even if by a web of alliances/dependants rather than its own military projection

It wasn’t quite so much what she did as the way it was done.

The spending plan looked bad and lack of confidence in it caused a technical issue where pension funds had to make it worse to protect themselves from the consequences, which made it even worse and they had to protect themselves from bigger consequences. But this is boring and not why she had to go imho.

The real problem and cause of the whole lack of confidence was that she got rid of senior people and refused to talk to independent government orgs who are there to check the plan isn’t shit.

She removed all the arse covering checks the British government has for budgets thinking she knew better, and as is clear with every mad interview she knows nothing.

Good user name too

Junior Devs could never code, yes including us

I’m afraid every post you make sounds like you asked an ai to write a roasting based on the article

Oh dear no I’m repying to agree. It is all good.

It’s a lazy Sunday and while I have a dozen better things to do trying to make clear posts about ai in a place where people will agree intelligently is a nice waste of time.

The soul thing is very poor ground to argue on yes which is why I immediately spent the time to make a different one :)

At very best it’s an intuitive understanding of “procedural oatmeal” where the brain spots patterns in the output so quickly it becomes tired of the art and loses interest.

But I think that’s being generous and I think of lot of the time it’s a purely to stake a position based on identity and a challenge to that identity.

The wider issue is you have to generate that energy, and you have to be able to capture more carbon than that generation released.

As I understand it doesn’t at all. This is why it’s seen as analagous to a perpetual motion machine, it’s an endless chain of power plants capturing each others carbon to no end.

You could use solar of course, but then why generate anything with fossil fuels just to capture the carbon with solar? Just use solar.

It’s not any of those reasons, it’s because it can only exist by being trained on human authored art and in many cases you can extract a decentish copy of the original if you can specify enough tags that piece was labelled with.

The ai model is a lossy database of art and using them to launder copyright violations should be illegal, is immorally stealing from the creator, and chills future artists by taking away the revenue they need while learning. This leads to ai model art having not enough future work to train on and the stagnation of the human experience as making beautiful things is not profitable enough, or doesn’t give the profit to those with power.

In a brief statement, the UK government said it had not been able to add its name to it because of concerns about national security and “global governance.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8edn0n58gwo

No idea if thats a real reason or not.

You’re right, I’ll edit a corrrection

Not to disrespect the amazing achievements of the Finn’s in that war, but they lost, and lost half their country. (Edit: 10%, not half. Sorry Finland.)

Incredible job not to lose the whole thing ofc.

Great at raising money, even better at giving it to nvidia

At absolute best it’s breaking even before debt service.

Maybe he’s still not just paying rent on some buildings and miraculously hasn’t been kicked out yet

Ask for the code and git history

The EU is doing great. It can pay for loads of stuff with the endless fines American tech companies rack up

I’m posting the same comment in two replies here now, terrible behaviour, but yes exactly this was an attempt to force a sale and get tiktok into American ownership.

It feels very neat that America would think tiktok would ultimately choose the option where it gets more money, but that the Chinese instead choose control.