Senderman

The misplaced hyphenations mid-paragraph in that abstract made me vocalise the text in my head as a reader with hiccups.

Fair use exemption makes specific reference to "purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting" - those are just the first three listed, and all three apply to a HN post.

I don't think "malicious chips" was a quote from Apple - Apple's letter mentioned "the existence of malware or other malicious activity." adding "Nothing was ever found." - which is pretty broad.

Every webstory is quoting that same excerpt - if the entire letter was printed somewhere, I can't find it.

Hi Joe.

This answer is a bit rambly, but I think my subconscious has a point to make, and I'm trying to tease it out.

This may come across the wrong way, but: which poor people? Your town, your country, or your whole planet?

I'm not an expert, but my hunch is if you start with a very local project (depending on where you live, it shouldn't be hard to find your local poverty), you'll get the answers you need - and I think if you're going to make a big impact, it will grow from that.

When I lived in L.A., young-me sat down with someone I thought was homeless - a panhandling gent sitting on some steps in Hollywood - we talked, about a bunch of things, he told me about his routine. Said he made about 30 bucks at night at that spot - also turned out he had a home, so I'd made an incorrect assumption.

A lot of my friends thought it was pretty weird that I would engage with the guy. Guess they had bad experiences with similar situations? I don't know. I doubt it; I suspect people were afraid. But what do you have to lose?

Talk to some of the people you're looking to help. A few small things will stand out in your mind - scale those.

I'm jumping the gun here, but if your mind's reaction is that that's not 'global' enough - I don't think anything grows to be a global force without a solid kernel, and that should be able to succeed at a small scale.

For what it's worth, that's my take.

Best of luck.

I've gotten lost in the 'assembly is too high level' series on this blog recently and it was very enjoyable. Also learned some things I didn't know.

That's a good point.

Makes me wonder if that 2D mountain range projection could be used to 'search' through a 3D map for a match.

Maybe my attention span let me down here, but did I miss the part where the alleged taste-altering virus was identified? I enjoyed the article, but I was really interested in finding out more about that particular point.

I'm pretty sure the implied sentiment is "Build programs that look impossible because they might turn out to be possible."

I don't think it's a dumb question. And I think you're right: the closer you get to the way the CPU you're targeting likes its memory optimally managed, you're basically heading towards assembly.

I have notions that there can be something 'between' assembly and, for instance, C, but that's a daydream of mine without any details worked out yet.

Assembly typically requires you to declare your own alignments. There are some higher-level assemblers, with macros and things, but you're right, there's rarely an abstract language offering low-level memory specification.

I also dislike the tendency to only expose the abstract view, although I think that trend is due to the difficulties involved in designing a language and compiler whose job is to output code for multiple architectures. Well, at least I hope that's why, because I don't know why you'd choose to offer less control in your language otherwise.

This comment might sound like I'm being difficult, but I'm genuinely asking.

You imply a downside for Bob in his avoidance of shared-vulnerability-relationship, you didn't explicitly state it - you said it hurts others who have expectations over him. Maybe the details of their marriage, which are none of my business, are where the answer is - but my question is: what is the downside for him?

Same on my 100 MHz Apricot. I like to think it helped. One thing that used to bug me is I wondered how much CPU time was being spent on rendering those graphs locally.

With automated processes for copyright claims becoming so common, fair use is really getting trampled on.

My [lay] understanding is that a portion of spacetime has yet to be found that has 0 countable things. I also believe 'countable' gets tricky the more you zoom in, as it were.

89% of Americans use the internet.