Does it matter if they did or didn't? Universities have indisputably lost the mandate of heaven, have they not? Arguing over whether they actually did any of those things is irrelevant, if a politically powerful group of people think they did! None of them have an objective definition, so it's going to come down to values, and universities / academics as a class have alienated themselves from a substantial portion of the population.
> Transhumanism is the belief that we can and should do things to make our bodies work better. Full stop.
Instead of a benign example like eyeglasses, let's say I murder someone so that I can harvest his organs and replace my failing ones with his. According to you that makes me a transhumanist.
Desiring to replace your failing organs, yes, but how you get the organs is a completely orthogonal moral issue. To wit, approximately 100% of all transhumanists are not murderers.
Dogs are not people, they do not have human rights, and the vast majority of dog breeds were created in the past few hundreds years via selective breeding by humans. It's not genocide, racism, or environmentally destructive to eliminate dangerous (meaning: capable of mauling or killing a healthy adult) dog breeds. Literally the only downside is that doing so would make some people sad.
UTF-8 encodes a unicode codepoint into 1, 2, 3, or 4 bytes. Assuming that you have a valid UTF-8 encoding of a codepoint, then the first byte tells you how many bytes are in the encoding. 0-127 inclusive means one byte, 192-223 means 2, 224-239 means 3, and 240-247 means 4. If the first byte is 0xC0 (192), then the sequence is two bytes long. However, not every 2-byte sequence that starts with 0xC0 is valid UTF-8. The uppermost bits of the second byte must be `10` in a valid 2-byte UTF-8 sequence. 0x27 does not meet that criteria, so `0xC0 0x27` is not valid UTF-8. If your escape function operates at the level of unicode codepoints but doesn't actually verify that they're valid, you end up copying a single quote into your "escaped" buffer that downstream parts of the code will hit.
The funny part is that not having any Unicode support in this part of the code and treating the data as ASCII (plus mistery bytes) would have worked correctly.
The author directly quoted the European Food Safety Authority, who found the same thing he did. There's a rich history of self-experimentation in medicine and nutrition, I don't think you need to be so negative.
My point was that no data gleaned from this experiment would've been meaningful, regardless of the result, because it was not conducted very rigourously.and on a sufficiently large scale.
rayiner's comment mentioning "prisoners, LGBTQI+ individuals, women, and people of color" is not about the build out. It's about community outreach and measuring impact on who is getting connected.
It's all in the Notice of Funding Opportunity for the program.
The only reference to actually diversity in the actual build out are:
* Complying with CFR 200.321, considering MWBE are considered in subcontracting, which is standard in many federal contracts
* Non-discrimination in hiring, also standard in federal contracts
* Encouraging, but not requiring awardees to broaden their recruitment to underrepresented groups:
> Ensuring that subgrantees prioritize hiring local workers and have robust and specific plans to recruit historically underrepresented populations facing labor market barriers and ensure that they have reasonable access to the job opportunities created by subgrantees
> One random example from the sea of examples - US within a month lost all the international respect it ever built after WWI lets say. I mean all of it, and its not coming back anytime soon.
In 2003 the USA invaded Iraq because the "intelligence community" made up claims about the existence of weapons of mass destruction, resulting in the deaths of over 100,000 Iraqi civilians and 4,700 coalition troops; and the rise of ISIS. You think Trump's actions in the past month are worse than that?
To our allies, yes and without a doubt. Maybe if we had invaded an ally based on questionable intelligence. But now, the US is siding with dictators and oligarchs and against Canada, Mexico, EU, England, Japan, South Korea. If you don't see that as worse or didn't know it was happening, you should re-evaluate your news sources. The oligarchs aren't your buddies and you're not going to be one.
I don’t think most people in Australia are really paying that much attention to what is happening in the US. And the fact remains that Australia needs the US and doesn’t really have any other real option. Our immediate neighbours are either even weaker than we are (New Zealand) or too culturally different to make a military alliance a viable option (Indonesia). The average Australian isn’t willing to incur the risk or cost of “going it alone” on national security. The UK is too far away to help us. The US is far away too, but the US retains an ability to project power globally which the UK has largely lost.
And if the polls are right, we are going to elect Dutton as our next PM, who even though he occasionally criticises Trump, on the whole is closer to Trump than our current government is.
Even my teenage kids hate the US now because of how Trump talks about Nato and that’s just because of how they talk in their War Thunder teams. Cozying up to Russia will do that for you. And they already didn’t respect the US because of how the government treats its own citizens.
It’s very hard to gain respect. It’s very easily lost.
> There is no corresponding popular replacement for C that's more minimalist than Rust and memory safe.
In the real world, memory safety is not all-or-nothing (unless you're willing to concede that Rust is not safe either, since unsafe Rust exists). I'm working on an embedded project in Rust and I'd MUCH rather be using Zig. The only safety thing that Rust would give me that Zig does not is protection from returning pointers to stack-allocated objects (there are no dynamic allocations and no concurrency outside of extremely simple ISRs that push events onto a statically allocated queue). But in exchange I have to deal with the presence of unsafe Rust, which feels like a gigantic minefield even compared to C.
> But in exchange I have to deal with the presence of unsafe Rust, which feels like a gigantic minefield even compared to C.
I think idiomatic coding norms for unsafe Rust are still a bit half-baked, and this is where something like Zig can have an advantage of sorts. You can see this also, e.g. in the ongoing proposals for a Pin<> alternative.
It does not, for slice indexing Rust is just as bad. My best guess is that this will likely blow up into such a big issue that the Rust devs are going to be forced to implement a feature to disable indexing (and leave just the safe .get()), or the kernel devs will fork the core library.
But Rust prevents a myriad of other things that would be panics in Zig or undefined behavior in C. It has a really strong type system, capable of reducing a large amount of invalid states and keeping many invariants throughout very large codebases.
Static checks remove many more potential sources of panic. I suspect that with certain restraint one can write Rust code that is statically guaranteed to not panic.
Also, Rust's panics may be recoverable, it's not necessarily fatal.