winstonewert

Perhaps you could refrain from slandering Rust proponents without any evidence.

I think the real question has to be: how do we determine what the regulations should be. Today, regulations are typically the product of dysfunctional political processes, and, no surprise, a lot of those regulations are unhelpful and a lot of helpful regulations are absent.

> but not everything is necessarily backed by the same kind of heap-allocated memory object.

Do you have an example, I thought literally everything in Python did trace to a PyObject*.

The problem is that sometimes it is not a necessary condition. Rather, the tests might have been checking implementation details or just been wrong in the first place. Now, when tests fails I have extra work to figure out if its a real break or just a bad test.

Some thoughts:

- It says that 3/4 of people kept working; to me, that seems like a big drop.

- Data is based on a survey of people in the program; I distrust data from surveys on principle.

- There seems to have been a reduction in the payment as they earned money, so its not really UBI as typically advocated.

There is likely a cost to the infrastructure necessary to enable calling 911 that scales with the number of users not the number of 911 calls. Where I'm at, there is a 75 cent per month fee added to phone plans to cover the costs of access to 911. If most people are on the free plan, the margin from the few paying customers won't cover it.

Then I'm sure you're willing to donate the cash to make it happen.

Perhaps - but they could just do what Microsoft did: bundle a version of Chromium.

It sounds to me like you are thinking something like: if they use XML, they'll have a well defined schema and will follow standardized XML types. But if they use JSON they may not have a well-defined schema at all, and may not follow any sort of standardized formats.

But to my mind, whether they have a well-defined schema and follow proper datatypes really has very little to do with the choice of XML or JSON.

My specific claim was that you could represent it in JSON, so you can't claim, as the post I responded to did, that JSON "cannot be used."

I'll fully grant, I don't want to write a document by hand in either of the JSON formats I suggested. Although, given the choice, I'd rather receive it in that format to be parsed than in any XML format.

I think I can see something of where you're coming from. But a question:

You complain about dates in JSON (really a specific case of parsing text in JSON):

> If they implement dates, sometimes it's unix-time, sometimes it's 1000x off from > that, sometimes it's a ISO8601-inspired string, and fuck sometimes I just get an > HTTP date. And so on.

Sure, but does not XML have the exact same problem because everything is just a text?

`{ type: "p", children: [{type: "text", text: "How would you represent "}, {type: "b", children: [{type: "i", children: [{type: "text", text: "mixed content"}]], {type: "text", text: " in JSON?"]}`

or:

`{paragraphs: [{spans: [{ text: "How you represent "}, {bold: true, italic: true, text: "mixed content"},{text: " in JSON?"}]}`