parkovski

This is surprising for me, I thought LLVM abstracted away platform ABIs.

I believe it is a heuristic that looks at text length, element type and class name.

I hope Epic wins this. I would buy from Apple again if they would open their platforms. I think it's ridiculous that when I was working on an app, the app would expire after a week unless I paid them more money for the privilege of keeping an app I wrote on a phone I paid for. Nevermind software other people made that I should be free to choose to run.

I think they just hit one megacommit, and the number they gave is how far away they are from one mebicommit.

Is it really though? Bing has been consistently worse than Google over the years. Maybe our definition of vendor lock-in needs to change.

Honestly at this point it doesn't even matter how good Bing is - we've been unconsciously trained to work with Google's algorithm in particular and they just have a de facto monopoly on the mental process a person goes through to formulate a search. Everyone's workflow everywhere will be worse and take more time if they voluntarily stop using Google, that's not what I consider a fair competitive landscape.

This reminds me of a meetup I attended last fall, they were talking about the Spectre/Meltdown issues. I asked the presenters if anything in chip manufacturing/verification processes had changed as a result of that and they seemed surprised.

To me, when a software bug shows up in a critical system, that means you actually have a logistics bug. Airplane control software should not be allowed to have bugs. CPUs should not be allowed to have bugs. And OS's should not be allowed to crash (looking at you Microsoft).

When one of these things happens, in my opinion the correct response is _not_ to just release fixes and workarounds and then say "we'll try really hard to not let it happen again." You do that, sure. But the first time you see airplane software malfunction, that means you need to change the way the software is written and released so that the whole class of issues will not ever happen again. You don't stop at a public apology, you don't fire the person that unintentionally wrote the bug. If you have to hire mathematicians to formally prove the critical paths of the software, you do that. If it costs 10x more to release bug-free software, oh well, you do that.

All of these corporate people thinking they can save money by spending less on quality are extremely naive. You can do a financial analysis of this, but they're doing it wrong. Did you ever consider what the cost of a whole generation just not trusting air travel at all would be?

I know the awesome meme seems overdone, but it's cool that you can search that one word and see curated lists of interesting/high quality projects.

[citation needed]

What about giving them a high potential but making their actual salary a function of approval rating? In order to maximize how much you make you have to work to unify your constituents.

I don't think you'd want this to be linear either. My feeling is you'd want the pay to stay pretty low anywhere below a 50% support level and climb pretty steeply above that, which discourages the split people down the middle mess the US is in. You'd probably accept that a small portion of people are nutcases so the salary would approach the max at around 85-90% support.

There are some potential exploits that you'd have to try to address but it's a thought.

Just a minor annoyance except of course for those not rich enough to own two phones, but I suppose if you didn't want to be oppressed you should have thought of that before you decided to be born poor, right?

And accordingly, I could give orders to their lawyers and their likelihood of doing what I say is about the same as the percentage of the company that I own.