261–270 of 294 posts
One issue with egui and shoving the whole page into a canvas element is accessibility -- having just a canvas element is a screen reader's worst nightmare
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have successfully linked to the only meaningfully loud bug in the borrow checker; declaring that as proof that Rust is a temporary step does not seem like the most cool-headed of evaluations, especially as it will be fixed by a new borrow checker in active development. These assertions are always made, and always alongside information suggesting the speaker has not actually spent very much time using Rust.
Eh, it might be the only meaningful issue with the borrow checker, but the language itself has more issues than just that. I adore rust and have done for years, but I also see it as a stepping stone language and worry about it gaining too much adoption
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on the details of the prior two startups and the third one. It may or may not be poor judgement. But to get back to your original post, will you blacklist every single candidate who has had a stint in the Crypto space? Do you also think that someone who worked on two Google chat apps (which are obviously discontinued) and now working on their third one is showing a lack of judgement?
> But to get back to your original post, will you blacklist every single candidate who has had a stint in the Crypto space? Not if they recognize the mistake and learn from it. > Do you also think that someone who worked on two Google chat apps (which are obviously discontinued) and now working on their third one is showing a lack of judgement? No, it's not fraud and the paycheck checks out. On the other hand, can yo…
what if they don't think it was any mistake and was just an honest job?
> can you imagine? Do you know someone like that?
Yes, personally know someone at Google in that space who worked on multiple chat apps and nicely climbed the career ladder.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32406095 I prepared that post since the question you posed comes up every week here, if not more frequently.
That’s cryptocurrency in its original use case: virtual money. This was all technically possible in 2009. What I was getting at was… what’s new? Billions and billions have been poured into all kinds of app development and R&D in this space and all we have is still what we had when Bitcoin launched. What are all these people in crypto building? Where is it? Where can I use it? Imagine if 25 years after the dot com era…
Increased social and political acceptance of Bitcoin as virtual money? That is a big deal.
> ...all we have is still what we had when Bitcoin launched.
False. In 2009, a very very small minority took it seriously. Now you have Blackrocks of the world getting in that business and SEC approving a Bitcoin ETF. So after Billions and billions of investment, now Crypto is a "serious business". Which is exactly why people in Afghanistan and Venezuela can rely on Bitcoin. They wouldn't have done so in 2009.
Another use case is digital art. Until NFTs, I am not sure how artists made money with their digital collections. Now, the creators of Bored Apes can fetch ~75 ETH (~100K USD)[1] per Ape, even today after the Crypto market has crashed. That is durable value and Crypto has enabled that avenue for artists. If you think NFTs are scam for laundering black money, burden of proof would be on you to make a case about why that is different from traditional paintings. And if you think traditional art too is nothing more than an avenue for money laundering, then... I'd propose we agree to disagree.
Yet another use case is branding. Just look at the adoption of NFTs[2] among top brands like Nike, D&G, Tiffany, Gucci, NFL, NBA, La Liga or Australian Open. If legit businesses and sports leagues are adopting Crypto for branding purposes, that is a resounding proof about the viability of this particular use case.
[1] https://opensea.io/collection/boredapeyachtclub
[2] https://www.coindesk.com/web3/top-brands-in-web3-nfts-and-th...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You can't ever get in a better situation than what you would get with a competent liberal-ish government and no cryptomoney. And what if you have only an incompetent authoritarian government? How would you help fight citizens of those governments? Crypto is a great tool there. Just because there are insufferable crypto-bros peddling shitcoins to make a quick buck doesn't mean entire Crypto field is useless. That'd…
> And what if you have only an incompetent authoritarian government? Then cryptomoney can give you a limited, non-zero amount of value. Still less than fixing the government, but it is easier to deploy. Even then, comparing it with the internet boom is bullshit.
Glad we agree on this. Everything else (eg. comparison with internet boom) is a matter of degree and only time will tell.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, you’re correct trend is the wrong term. Was that an aggressive statement? It wasn’t intended to be. I find the statements around unsafe in Rust to generally be incorrect though, from what I can tell, it’s only ever used in quite narrow cases and not generally across the vast majority of Rust software.
Have a look at Rust/WinRT where the Microsoft team is the opinion others should provide the safer wrappers on top.
Not having looked at that API specifically, it might be that they think there are perhaps different approaches to implementing the safe interfaces, and those may be best left to specific implementations for UI abstraction frameworks, like Druid.
Just speculating.
I saw a YT video about how safe Rust is. I want to give it a try but I do mainly web applications, where I use Spring Boot and front-end frameworks. From what I have read Rust is better for system level or regular applications (not web apps). Can modern web applications be built efficiently with Rust? And by efficiently I mean, is the ecosystem there (libraries and tools). I imagine the following would be needed.. 1)…
> 4) Dependency injection. Can you explain why DI needs an entire framework/libary? When I was taught DI in school, I was given the impression that DI was a $1000 term for a $5 concept in that without DI, you write code like this: class Foo(object): def __init__(self): self.bar = GetBar() whereas with DI, you write this: class Foo(object): def __init__(self, bar): self.bar = bar Obviously, I'm grossly misunderstandin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
JS is the best language for web - and generally for high level systems design - and honestly I don't know why people don't want to see it. Good parts of JS are: first class functions and closures and prototypical inheritance. Find decently popular language with those things implemented well, good luck. Rest of JS features are a noise, improvements of developer work ergonomics (all those let/const, modules, async/awai…
Because lots of languages have first-class functions, and prototypical inheritance isn't actually that good an idea and most people just use it to implement bad class systems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reference counting is much slower than 'garbage collection'.
Technically yes, but if you only use it when you need it, it's often not a performance concideration. And for systems programming, the often overlooked truth is that people care far less about perfect performance than they do about control - ref counting doesn't give up control to a mysterious oracle running in the background which may or may not wreck your performance in hard to predict ways, it just pays a known co…