DinaCoder98

I've always wondered what the semantics of "national security" are when the deployment of this phrase led directly to 9/11

> their several-decades-old faux-environmental schlock

Sorry, what are you referring to?

> Nowadays if you refer to "alternative meat", that means plant based meat substitutes 99% of the time.

in what context? I'm betting this would necessitate not mentioning cell-cultured or lab-grown meat at all.

Ok, this would still obviate the use of gRPC on lambda

> but they can choose what part of the industry they support.

Sometimes they can, sometimes they can't, sometimes it's up to what they care and focus about.

> If many care, they can make an impact.

Sure, theoretically. Expecting any results seems like a fool's game though. Who would bother when the state is right there and perfectly capable of making rational decisions better than any individual consumer could?

> And that's the crux. Many, or most people don't give a shit. Not about climate change, not about plastic in the ocean. Not about animals living in factories without seeing the sun ever. They care about their immediate surroundings, their taxes and the money in their pocket. They don't want further problems, someone else should take care of that (unless it increases taxes).

Yea, it's almost like this is a "tragedy of the commons" issue known to be extremely difficult to impact by individual decision making. And who can blame the individual? Who could shoulder that responsibility and emerge sane? The only entity involved one might expect to make a difference is the state with their ability to override the inherent irrationality of the masses.

Christ, what are people being taught in school these days?

gRPC is for long-lived services (and connections). Combining it with lambda doesn't make much sense.

The idea the individual consumer is responsible for policing industry is farcical on the face of it.

Is there any evidence that x86 can compete with arm on per-watt computation?

The reason we have bloat is it's easier to satisfy stakeholders if you don't give a damn. There's really no reason to discuss this at all once you realize this.

But of course, ranting and reading rants is satisfying in its own right. What's the problem?

I'd agree if our society had figured out any sane way to respond to crime in the first place, but that seems even worse than our barely extant resources for drug addiction in the first place. Somehow we're more willing to pay out the ass to make people feel bad than we are to make them feel better.

I was pessimistic about grapheme-based orientation towards text, deleted it to research more, and I've come to the conclusion that this is simply not a consensus opinion. Can you give me an example where grapheme-based sorting makes a critical difference from codepoint-oriented sorting on a normalized text? Full unicode composition certainly seems to provide a reasonable solution with western languages, CJK characters, and romanization of CJK characters, but that leaves a hell of a lot of scripts that I don't know about.

I mean unicode is incredibly complex, but it doesn't even seem like there's a consensus outside of swift's string implementation of what a grapheme even is.

(Granted, this might support the above concept that people can't even agree on what a string is, but unicode code points seems like a reasonable baseline to expect from a modern language. That said, rust doesn't even include unicode normalization in the standard library, although the common crate for it seems like a reasonable solution.)

> Async work is generally slow and terrible, at least for the pace that you need to achieve to succeed.

Really depends on the work that needs to get done. Sometimes it's just a matter of time and work that needs to be put in, and async work is perfectly suited to that.

Ah, I thought you were referring to the benefits of such a system as compared to zig and blithely passing the responsibility of input validation on to the programmer. Rust of course demonstrates the benefit of checking validity at initialization.