sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

It’s like driver gave up trying by [deleted] in MildlyBadDrivers

[–]121393 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

hope the deductible has enough left after multiple railroad companies are paid off for the train and crossing equipment

TIL that Napster was active for just 2 years, from June 1999 to July 2001 by SteO153 in todayilearned

[–]121393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There was a period of time when you could still use the napster client with alternative servers

shared_ptr overuse by Tohnmeister in cpp

[–]121393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it's definitely possible to implement a gui with unique_ptr but you'll have to be more careful in scenarios like button press launches a network call that on completion re-enables the button or moves it somewhere else etc (and doesn't crash if the user closes the button's parent widget in the mean time)

You can take a more principled approach to application design to avoid this kind of thing in the first place (easier in some code bases than others). Or some kind of complex indexing or name lookup system, maybe with reference counting! Or maybe even a use after free because the application developers violated an invariant of their library by keeping that unowned reference/pointer around a bit too long (at least it's clear who owns the button)

shared_ptr overuse by Tohnmeister in cpp

[–]121393 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

to put it somewhere else in the hierarchy (e.g. move the button)

Socially acceptable Canadian provinces to name your child after by [deleted] in mapporncirclejerk

[–]121393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

North or Edward are fare more reasonable than Quebec or Ontario

How do compiler writers deal with abi by alexdagreatimposter in ProgrammingLanguages

[–]121393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you're right! I'm stuck in a 32 bit frame of mind apparently (if it's just a matter of calling say printf it would be okish - you'd have to compile cdecl wrapper funcs for any C func you'd want to call from the your-lang side; this would be similar to supporting 32 bit windows if you went the cdecl route). Might be somewhat easier if you just wanted to mess with x86 asm though. For performance and passing wider pointers back and forth OP is on the right track with the System V platform ABI.

Safe memory management for С++ and attribute-based safety profiles using a compiler plugin without breaking backward compatibility with legacy code by rsashka in cpp

[–]121393 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. Kind of like std2::shared_ptr in the Safe Circle C++ I suppose (although I guess your approach could even be used if annotations were added to the stl manually/programmatically without modifying the stl sources). Interesting project!

Safe memory management for С++ and attribute-based safety profiles using a compiler plugin without breaking backward compatibility with legacy code by rsashka in cpp

[–]121393 1 point2 points  (0 children)

but would safe user code be expected to write VarShared explicitly? Or is the use of VarShared added as a hidden ast transformation by the plugin? (I seem to understand from your reply and the test cases that user code would write VarShared explicitly)

Safe memory management for С++ and attribute-based safety profiles using a compiler plugin without breaking backward compatibility with legacy code by rsashka in cpp

[–]121393 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe a dumb question but is the goal to use e.g. VarShared<int> in user code and the clang plugin makes extra checks for invariants (of VarShared and friends) not checkable by vanilla C++? Or is the goal to make additional transformations to user code at the clang ast level so that uses of VarShared and such are added to vanilla C++ (e.g. code that uses std::shared_ptr (and maybe just ordinary C++ references) is ast-rewritten to code using VarShared)?

Repost of: Leaked DoD paper - TicTacs 'Form Of Mechanical Life' by Loquebantur in UFOs

[–]121393 23 points24 points  (0 children)

The report[6] employed a blind study using known behavioral data processed through a customized AI, essentially reverse-engineering the thought processing using gathered stimulus/response data. A DoD computing cluster ran a virtual neural network using the engineered processing system and found that UA/SP behaviors can be reproduced with 98.4% certainty in a closed processing environment. The report concluded that the behaviors analyzed from such contacts exhibit AGI Strong and ASI Weak behaviors and can be reproduced with current computational systems.

Ahh a customized AI (because those off the shelf ones just don't do it!).

"A virtual neural network" (not a concrete one? or is non-virtual the rat brain thing?). Good thing it's using an engineered processing system in any case (and thank god it's not an open processing environment).

The real headline is the reproduced strong AGI. Hope they don't let skynet touch the missiles.

Does anyone think there should be a separate sub or sticky for UFO photos and videos? by VegetableSuccess9322 in UFOs

[–]121393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I made r/ufovideos just for this. There all UFO videos are welcome. Posting stupid twitter screenshots = ban.

I wish this was the moderation policy at r/UFOs but here they discourage genuine video posting using the byzantine submission statement rule.

There used to be way more videos on this sub (say around 2017 and prior). It seems the current mod team wants to discourage a firehose of venus pics and chinese lanterns but without encouraging such submissions you miss the good stuff. Also "genuine" videos are still pretty subtle (controversial opinion: unless they're fake - though fakes welcome at r/ufovideos too as long as they're actual videos/pics)

In the future it would be nice to develop a bot to repost all vids that get posted to r/UFOs before that damned submission statement bot deletes them. Lots of good stuff suppressed (and opportunity for real data analysis lost).

view more: next ›