rakel_rakel

You can see it in the code, lstat vs stat and copy_special, copy_fifo vs copy_file. They're all in utils.c.

from the lstat man page:

     The lstat() function is identical to stat() except when the named file is
     a symbolic link, in which case lstat() returns information about the link
     itself, not the file the link references.

symbolic link example:

    $ tree test1
    test1
    |-- file.txt
    `-- link.txt -> ../link.txt

    0 directory, 2 files

    $ cp -r test1 test2
    $ tree test2
    test2
    |-- file.txt
    `-- link.txt

    0 directory, 2 files

    $ cp -R test1 test3
    $ tree test3
    test3
    |-- file.txt
    `-- link.txt -> ../link.txt

    0 directory, 2 files

For posterity, -R with added -L

    $ cp -RL test1 test4
    $ tree test4/
    test4/
    |-- file.txt
    `-- link.txt

    0 directory, 2 files

I enjoyed this post.

I don't know if this is the correct thread for it, but am I the only one thinking that this call for regulation is nothing but a way for the American AI companies to try and mitigate being overrun by the competition from open models? To me that's obvious, but I'm very often wrong, and very likely that's the case now too.

ha! I was happily surprised to see this article posted because it felt like it was picking up where the technical discourse was before LLM's took over.

2022 explains that perfectly, albeit leaves me less happy.

If that company only hosted projects written in assembly and you don't write assembly... then you not doing business there is the desired outcome for the both of you, what's the gotcha there?

In a recent interview the founder stated something like "we're enabling people to write software at a fraction of what it used to cost". I believe that to currently be true... maybe... if you're a single dev building something that Lovable can be used for.

What I'm struggling to understand is that _someone_ is paying, right? $400M is probably a lot more than a fraction of what people spent on javascript CRUD apps before? It seems more like centralization than anything else to me? What am I missing?

Interesting, thanks. I don't know where "around here" is, but the signals I've seen in a lot of articles is that the demand for junior software people has taken a dive since a year or two back, with student programs etc getting cancelled. One googler said they were getting a junior to their team and that was kind of a big deal because it hadn't happened in that whole department for a long time.

In relation to that, I guess my question becomes: if the same thing will happen in math research, who will write the ten page math proof prompts in the future?

> I don't think researchers in math/TCS will be made obsolete, but I think it will instead no longer make sense to work on any low-hanging, or even medium-hanging (you know what I mean) fruit. We'll be needed for problems where actual novel approaches are needed.

I wonder how this compares to what we see happening with "juniors" in software development? In math research, do you also get the training for the profession from working on the low hanging fruits for a while, to then move to the medium-hanging, and later go on to work on previously unsolved stuff?

What a great post! I would love to read more of these for other films.

> Everything in the set was real. We couldn't fake any of it, because audiences are so sophisticated now in their knowledge of computers. > ... > - Cory Faucher (Special Effects Coordinator)

This sentiment seems to run throughout the movie, and I believe it's why it's held up so well in terms of visuals, I don't think it would have aged nearly as well as it has if more CGI (or other ways of "faking" things) had been been used.

As for the question (in <references[9]>):

> Some code associated with Nedryland is visible on screen. It looks like actual source code[9] with Classic Mac OS API functions calls.

That looks like old Pascal, and since the window has MPW (Macintosh Programmers Workshop) in the title, that's probably it?

People creating things that didn't exist before is so refreshing, and Prahou is such an amazing artist. Making it look easy (or for the untrained eye like silly scribbles on old thinkpads) he created a whole world around his characters, and the talent and rigor is super impressing.

I would recommend anyone to dive into it!

Not going with something already widely deployed (like strlcpy), which could also be used in userland (strscpy can't, it's return value in case of failure is out of scope) is exactly what I would expect from Linux. You do you!

I read every piece like this one as: Money is moving in the vulnerability space now, when as before the LLM hype incentivized that, your best bet was that someone skilled enough would accept living with the financial insecurity of being a gig worker to hopefully stumble upon your projects bug bounty program. Is the bet here is that the hype lasts, and that people willingly will keeping on paying Dario to be able to contribute?

> But give it 1-3 months and the open models will catch up.

I wish that this would stopped being thrown around, what is this timeline based on? How good is your open model from between March and May?

Also, having read "Gödel, Escher, Bach" I know that the hare never catches up with the turtle.