Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)LA
Posts
20
Comments
1,049
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Is this even true or just a myth? From what I know, law doesn't actually mandate people to be jerkasses. Also at least in sane countries, you can't trademark words that are in the dictionary like "hoard" or "hoarder", since by definition they have prior art.

  • Signal is OK as a beginner privacy tool. Like with all gateway drugs or gateway animes or gateway videogames, you gotta start somewhere.

    But it does is certainly a platform at-risk. Storage is US-centered, connectivity can be cut at any moment, and it's quite centralized to the point of forbidding 3p clients from interacting with the main Signal "network".

    I come from the 90s. XMPP / Jabber is so much better.

  • .at_unchecked()

    What kind of barbarism is that?

    Doing that kind of split would kill genericity (more than it already is). If I'm using [] is because what I want is, more or less, to just access the value; not to maybe randomly and without any kind of source-level control or projected time/space boundaries go to the blockchain to check if the Rust devs are in the mood today to have blessed the given statement with the arguments given.

    Frick. At least give me something like [checked(5)] or [unchecked(5)] for a more natural syntax. The more considering it has been possible to add compile-time checked access with something like [integral_constant<size_t,5>{}] since at least C++03! It just needs someone to propose a standardized notation shortcut. Or if there was some way to inquire or static_assert that the checks on the natural syntax are actually elided if I'm doing them myself elsewhere. But at it stands, uglifying the syntax is the worst of all worlds.

  • I think it’s pretty much guaranteed that they’re not going to take the sensible route of making it opt-out,

    Because that's not the sensible route in the future, whether we like it or not. Hardened STL is being announced in the papers as "we are going to start with these silly one-line fixes that in theory should perturb no one, but as we iterate over this we're gonna start breaking things", which is not what you want to hear from the default.

    One good example: placing enforced bounds check into the operator[] of std::array<> of all places. People keep telling me that I should be using std::array instead of normal C arrays, but then punish me for using std::array? That ends up making people revert to the True Old Ways That Work (aka: C arrays).

  • but isn’t one of the job of the police supposed to actually check people’s ID?

    Define "people's", because not doing so is how we get into a police state and that was some Germany shit. Everyone? A subset at random? A subset at convenience? A subset based on how brown they look?