The vibes I got in the other thread about Wedson's announcement is that the concerns may be valid but there are indeed a handful of contributors who are aggressively shouting down Rust contributor's efforts to set up the processes you outlined based on hard prejudice. The video Wedson posted was hard to watch. From the outside looking in it looks to be way more about ego than any particular technical roadblock.

Furthermore Lina's concerns here are only broader what you are saying:

When I wrote the DRM scheduler abstractions, I ran into many memory safety issues caused by bad design of the underlying C code. The lifetime requirements were undocumented and boiled down to "design your driver like amdgpu to make it work, or else".

My driver is not like amdgpu, it fundamentally can't work the same way. When I tried to upstream minor fixes to the C code to make the behavior more robust and the lifetime requirements sensible, the maintainer blocked it and said I should just do "what other drivers do".

Mainlining memory safety improvements, in C, for C code should be welcomed and it is very concerning if she indeed got shunned because the end goal was to offer lifetime guarantees (which to my admittedly non-expert eye sounds like it would be a good thing for memory safety in general).

The concern from those contributors (and we might soon see the same in QEMU) is that these bindings are essentially a weaponization which forces the great majority of contributors to learn Rust or drop out. Essentially a hostile takeover.

Seems like a moral panic over absolutely nothing (where are the Rust developers allegedly forcing people to learn Rust? all I've seen in these threads today is Rust developers asking for an open mind and a willingness to collaborate), and that the response to this "concern" is to block any and all changes that might benefit Rust adoption is really concerning (but unfortunately not unsurprising) behavior.

Easter is not inherently a christian holiday goddammit. At least not in its popular celebration. Last I checked Jesus didn't pop eggs from his butt when he resurrected (that we know of) and the preachings of the Easter Bunny are unfortunately not canon in Catholicism.

To complain about "religious persecution" of profoundly pagan (if not outright heretical depending on who you ask) traditions is... certainly an interesting exercise in religious cognitive dissonance.

There is almost certainly internal communication that basically reads "hey let's get an actress who sounds as close to ScarJo as possible". There's also the CEO tweeting "her" on the day of release.

Is that legal? IANAL, but OpenAI's reaction of immediately shutting that shit down leads me to believe they realized it is, in fact, illegal.

Your comparison is also incorrect. You're not getting a JEJ soundalike, you're getting a JEJ soundalike to do a Darth Vader impersonation. Meaningfully different semantics. They don't just want "white american woman who vaguely sounds like ScarJo I guess" they have proven beyond doubt that they want "The AI from the 2013 movie Her starring Joaquin Phoenix and Scarlett Johansson".

Also legality aside, it's really fucking weird and ethically wrong. I don't care if it's legal or not, you shouldn't be able to make an AI replicate someone's voice without their consent.

... So what you're saying is you're choosing the bear?

I am not American and have never been anywhere close to either of these stores and have no fucking idea what a blue light special or whatever is.

The good thing about comedy though is that anyone with half a brain can understand the context clues and laugh. The joke isn't about k-mart or sears.

Unlike here where it's all embittered middle children in their 40s in their mom's basement

Real back-end requirements: when x, y goes in (in JSON-as-an-XML-CDATA-block because historical reasons), I want you to output x+y+z+æ+the proof to P=NP.

æ will require you yo compile x+y in CSV, email it to Jenny, who will email back the answer. She doesn't quite know how to export excel sheets though so you'd better build a robust validator. No, we don't know what æ is supposed to look like, Rob from Frontend knows but he's on vacation for the next 8 months.

The request must be processed under 100 ms as the frontend team won't be able to prioritize asynchronous loading for another 10 sprints and we don't want the webpage to freeze.

And why does your API return a 400 when I send a picture of my feet? Please fix urgently, these errors are polluting my monitoring dashboard and we have KPIs on monitoring alerts.

It's even dumber than you think:

Producers elsewhere in the European Union can continue to sell vegetarian food with meat names in France.

It's so incredibly dumb it's honestly amazing.

"Humanity is a disease" is not the same statement as "humanity is capable of committing atrocities" though. The latter leaves the door open for a "but", while the former makes humanity itself a systemic problem but refuses or "forgets" to pin the blame on anyone or any system.

Such statements devolve the conversation into defeatist pseudo-nihilism, where a "true nihilist" knows that the betterment of humanity will have to come from within.

I do agree that capitalism is not the root of all evil, but it is central to the particular "planet's fucked, housing is unaffordable, and no-one cares" doomer sentiment that is depicted in the meme (at least that is how I read it).

Of course he does.

The point is that Batman is the archetype of a right-wing superhero. Batman is how rightwingers understand social justice: accumulate as much wealth as you can, use crushing physical violence to punish bad guys, act charitably at an individual level but do not ever work to solve social issues at a systemic level.
Even in-universe he's nowhere near as much of a positive force as he could be if he used his money to force political and social change instead of as an outlet for his mental issues.

He's not actively villainous because right-wingers don't see themselves as such. But when that fantasy meets reality, you get Elon Musk.

That's a Japan thing and a legislative failure.

What normally happens in most countries is the law would say something vague like "digital means or devices such as floppy disks or equivalent".
Then the Executive makes and maintains the rules of application of that law according to the Hierarchy of Norms (things probably are organized differently in Common Law countries so I don't know the English term but the principle is the same), which dictates in more detail how the law is to be applied ("please use a web form, or a USB keys for legacy processes").

Sometimes the executive lags behind a bit but typically it's just a ministry making decisions within the margin of the law, so it's not too bad.

Nothing inherently, you can go ahead and eat apples from your apple tree.

The main issue with "organic" foods is that the term is usually very badly regulated. Sometimes there is no difference between "organic" and "non organic"... besides price. Sometimes "organic" foods use very ecologically unfriendly techniques, or are grown/processed in countries where supply chains are not inspected anyway.

Then there's the fact that if something is different, it may not always be an environmental or health win. Growing your food in 30cm of water may be one organic and traditional way to avoid using pesticides (see: rice), but doing that with corn in the middle of Arizona would obviously be a terrible idea!

Anyway, overall I don't think organic foods are worse if you're well off enough that the price is not an issue. But you shouldn't feel personal guilt for buying whatever's cheaper, because quite often the alternative does not justify the price anyway. Eating truly "organic" food unfortunately requires a lot more involvement than picking the green package at a national supermarket chain.