Awesome. Has anyone solved the issue where google websites (google search, gmail, google calendar, and so on) start running incredibly slow using Safari?
I really can’t help but think of the simulation hypothesis. What are the chances this copy-cat technology was developed when I was alive, given that it keeps going.
We may be in a simulation, but your odds of being alive to see this (conditioned on being born as a human at some point) aren't that low. Around 7% of all humans ever born are alive today!
In order to address the chances of a human being alive to witness the creation of this tech, you'd have to factor in the humans who have yet to be born. If you're a doomer, 7% is probably still fine. If we just maintain the current population for another century, it'll be much lower.
I dont believe that percentage. Especially considering how spread the homo branch already was more than 100 000 years ago. And from which point do you start counting? Homo erectus?
Every time you cat a BSV file, your terminal beeps like it's throwing a tantrum. A record separator (RS) based file would be missing this feature! In other words, my previous comment was just a joke! :)
By the way, RS is decimal 30 (not octal '\030'). In octal, RS is '\036'. For example:
$ printf '\036' | xxd -p
1e
$ printf '\x1e' | xxd -p
1e
The same effect applies to political parties. The people that care about X focus their complaints to the party that is trying to address issues with X.
Yeah, pretty much. If you look historically, it's always that traitors and betrayers get the most severe punishment. It just wakes up something very basic in humans.
Agree that this discourse about “extending R’s useful life” by adding a compiler is mostly just silly. It’s equally valid to say the reason for building any of the (numerous) libraries for R is to “prolong R’s usefulness”.
I think you’ve proposed a real reason a language’s popularity changes. But let’s add a few more: First, as languages grow in use that in itself leads to more use (and vice versa). Second, users of languages use said languages as protection of their jobs, livelihoods, culture, and so on by simply not learning less popular languages or allowing the use of less commonly used languages. There is power in numbers.
IMO R’s problem has nothing to do with R’s limitations (which when limited are easily expanded). To the contrary, if anything, R’s ability to enable users to do so much is more of a problem than its limitations. The norms (culture) of a company say using many different languages for different organizational roles can clash with an R user who can succinctly work cross-functionally. Employees could be interested in preserving siloed roles and employers could prefer limited scope for employees. Instead of one person building something and presenting to users, you could have many employees serving in many roles using standard languages for each role. R is basically a wrapper language, and the ease at which third-party libraries can be built and installed for R, and R’s flexibility is inherently “useful” but less dogmatic. Less dogmatic but also less standard and less common.
… So I just don’t think the problem for R is that “it’s not deemed useful” and I actually think such an argument is disingenuous on the part of people who want to limit the power of R users. Granted, I think, particularly in large organizations, using the most popular languages in itself has valid justification. But the reason is to attract employees and to build siloed expertise; not to enhance “usefulness”.
I very much think R is more of a “do everything language” because put simply, R lets developers do a lot more than Python in the language itself. It’s how the implementation of “polars” in R basically looks the exact same as in Python. R is like English in its ability to bring in other languages. Take a look at how many OOP systems there are. The best book on these subjects is https://adv-r.hadley.nz/metaprogramming.html.
I biked through Amsterdam as a commuter along with everyone else for a week, and it just blew me away. Everyone was absolutely predictable and part of the “school of fish”. No hesitation or ill-conceived politeness.
It was only a week but it was so refreshing. I think about this experience daily when driving because I think of how much time would be saved if people just knew absolutely when to take their turn and took it; instead of processing each decision and deciding based on their current mood. People knew the damn rules and norms.
So, I think it’s a function of having a critical mass, being necessary, and being embedded already as a norm. I don’t believe a city could make riding without a helmet legal and expect any sort of increase in safety …
1. Almost everyone cycles. So all drivers are themselves cyclists. So they treat other cyclists with consideration.
2. The road/cycle infrastructure is set up to separate cars and bikes wherever possible. And where they share routes, cars are often explicitly second class users ("auto te gast" - cars, you're guests).
3. In any collision between a car and a bike, the driver will almost always be the one found at fault.
