161–170 of 186 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As far as I can tell it probably is American, all the earliest mentions of it on Wikipedia are American. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin_blue_line
[flagged]
The problem is aging code sours like milk. I empathize but we need to have people take over these initiatives and refactor them into something easier the maintain. Not saying introduce a new language or anything but change how we fundamentally look at “The Kernel”. I think reducing scope and making it so hardware providers must maintain their drivers is a good start. If your toolchain doesn’t suffice, create a new to…
> create a new kernel in rust and force a paradigm shift. And then what? A kernel by itself isn't very useful. Even if your kernel is somehow superior in every way, you need software to target it, so to be a successful replacement for linux you basically have to be completely compatible with any software that currently runs on linux, which not only means a massive amount of work just to keep up with changes in linux,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As far as I can tell it probably is American, all the earliest mentions of it on Wikipedia are American. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin_blue_line
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The phrase has nothing to do with any flags used much later by US policemen. That is the whole point of the thread. >far-right authoritarianism Get a grip. Even if it were a reference to what you say it is, that has nothing to do with the "far right". It is stock standard centre-right (and centre-left for that matter) position in the US to support the police in principle (if not, obviously, in every action theyve eve…
Regardless of its history, the current popularity of the phrase is most certainly part of the neofascist movement in the US. Its rise was a direct response to the "Black Lives Matter" call for accountability - essentially doubling down on asserting that lawless behavior by the police is justified in service of some authoritarian "order", regardless of the destruction of everyone else's rights. In a free society, the…
So yes, to make it concrete and cut past the bullshit euphemisms, sometimes the police will shoot an "unarmed" black man. Sometimes, very rarely, the so-called "unarmed" person not only doesn't have a gun but doesn't pose a real threat to the life or limb of another person. That sucks. But we cannot get rid of those "type I errors" without curtailing the use of force in a way that produces more "type II errors" in the sense that the police don't use force in a scenario where they should have, and someone gets hurt unnecessarily by someone that should have been disarmed or killed by a policeman earlier.
That is in no sense a defence of those extremely rare cases where a policeman just murders someone and there is no justification or excuse.
It is not unreasonable for them to point out that if they are held to an impossible standard where they get blamed if they don't perfectly protect the public but they also get blamed if they ever have to make a split second decision with limited information, choose to use force, and it turns out not to have been necessary, that that impossible standard is not fair.
None of that has anything to do with "neofascism" or "authoritarianism", which are simply bogeymen invented by the left.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regardless of its history, the current popularity of the phrase is most certainly part of the neofascist movement in the US. Its rise was a direct response to the "Black Lives Matter" call for accountability - essentially doubling down on asserting that lawless behavior by the police is justified in service of some authoritarian "order", regardless of the destruction of everyone else's rights. In a free society, the…
I don't think the police are "biased against everyone" in the first place. Nobody has said that lawless behaviour by the police is justified in the service of order. What is said is that the police are entitled to use force and have to make quick decisions about the use of force in very trying circumstances on a daily basis. In a country of 330m people full of guns and with highly differential rates of violent crime…
The problem is aging code sours like milk. I empathize but we need to have people take over these initiatives and refactor them into something easier the maintain. Not saying introduce a new language or anything but change how we fundamentally look at “The Kernel”. I think reducing scope and making it so hardware providers must maintain their drivers is a good start. If your toolchain doesn’t suffice, create a new to…
>Bring solutions. Tech debt is just OpEx to everyone else. What if there was a rust compiler to C, that produced like readable, compliant C code for the kernel. And then developers that want to work in rust can publish their original rust code to some third party location, so the reviewers have no idea if the C code they receive it was originally written in rust or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What extra effort? If you match upstream it's a drop in replacement and anyone who cares will use it. If they don't it's because they don't care.
And what if they do care, but they simultaneously need features available in multiple different forks? You can't run two kernels at the same time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what if they do care, but they simultaneously need features available in multiple different forks? You can't run two kernels at the same time.
Then it means the rust code does impact the C code and the rust people were lying.
This is primarily around Rust filesystem drivers. If you want to run a filesystem but it's implemented in Rust, you'd have to use that fork. If another person had the same issue (say a GPU driver that some maintainer decided they didn't like because of the country of origin or some other petty reason), then that would have to be a fork as well. Suddenly, you can't use that GPU with a Rust-implemented filesystem, because you have to pick one of the forks, or you have to make your own merged kernel from the two.
"Just fork it" doesn't work here. It's a logistical nightmare.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or the non-politically-loaded phrase that the sitcom is named for.
There's a difference between "not politically-loaded decades ago" and "not politically-loaded now". We still let people use the Swastika if they had a harmless tradition of using it beforetime. But if anybody new uses it, we assume it's because of the murder.
I don't know how Tso was using it and don't care nor have any reason to defend him, don't mistake me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The old-school guys want to keep things old-school. The new-school guys want to make things better in a new way The new school guys greatly underappreciate the wisdom of why and instead try to change things without first understanding.
What happened here? Years ago Linus was talking about how he thought positively about Rust in the Kernel in the future if the kinks could be worked out. Now a group of people have built out a set of drivers which are working great, well tested and integrated, and one maintainer has decided they just don't want to merge it so the whole project is indefinitely stalled. I'd be pretty upset if I was working on Asahi sinc…