strawhatguy

True and I agree.

But I'll just say there's a reason why the phone app icon on smartphone is of a receiver, when fewer people have even seen one, and how it works is a bit different, despite the goal being the same.

We understand the new by comparisons to the existing.

64KiB is all anyone needs, wasn’t it?

Please. Yes the pricing sucks, but that means more capacity to build more computers will develop. It will equalize at some point. Crashing the data center boom in a vain attempt to get a cheaper pc is a) short-sighted and selfish and b) counterproductive, bans on data centers would almost guarantee permanent high prices, or lower performing parts.

Higher prices now pays for buildout of facilities which lowers prices later.

So they are

bluetooth audio is probably all one needs for phone <-> car integration. but carplay/android auto are sadly really popular. So already, your phone can connect in two different ways, just over bluetooth, with cars today. And car companies have to support both. Plus the car must show something on the screen when a phone isn't there, and the rear-view camera isn't on, at the very least on test drives/ showroom displays.

I don't know. On balance, the reality is cars are better overall nowadays, but every aspect of our life has gotten more complicated, including cars.

If you had the option of no screen at all, no rear-view camera, and with physical switches, would you? If this Slate truck gets released, that's the closest, but it's still required to have a rear-view camera/screen sadly.

Pretty much this. The less software on the car, the fewer problems.

It's practically impossible to test every permutation of code against every system. Maybe AI can help, but practically it'll just mean the software gets more complicated, with more features. And to top it all off, more and more features get regulated, so they have to be there. The rear-view camera requirement in particular, since you need a screen to see the output. And if you have a screen... well it's an already paid cost, so, might as well display other things too.

We should kill the reg.

It's one of the reasons the US military is so good. As a soldier, you know they will come for you, behind enemy lines, so you can fight like hell, knowing that your fellows have your back.

The gains in morale can not be underestimated.

Yes it's quite the blend!

There's probably a case for both. Core logic might benefit from hard types deep in the bowels of unchanging engine.

The real world often changes though, and more often than not the code has to adapt, regardless of how elegant are systems are designed.

I actually wonder about his conclusion that 50 years hence English will be unrecognizable.

There will be changes of course. Yet we are also more connected than ever, whereas the next town over would be a whole day trip in the past. The separation allows for more divergence.

Well, maybe if we get to Mars, differences might crop up again.

In fairness , Dickens is quite dry. My mind would wonder off.

In some sense, it's better these days, competition has led to care for the reader that probably didn't exist as much then, since so few people can read.

The alternative is one type, with many functions that can operate on that type.

Like how clojure basically uses maps everywhere and the whole standard library allows you to manipulate them in various ways.

The main problem with the many type approach is several same it worse similar types, all incompatible.

Iterating often is not helpful for stable systems over time.

I like go's library it's got pretty much everything needed out of the box for web server development. Backwards compatibility is important too.

But open source didn't do the Linux model. It did the GitHub model of open to anyone.

If anything the heirarchy of trust the Linux model uses will be more important now.

Possibly, but AIs might shift to more curated content, which has it's own dangers I suppose.

There are definitely challenges, but I've been around long enough now that we'll adapt, and muddle through.

The trouble will come from humans' reaction to the changes, less from the changes themselves