Yup, I would strongly agree. Diagnostics are one of those things that's easy to let slip by the wayside, but we've seen a huge payoff for users with all the time we've invested in ours. Glad to see other languages like Elm help raise the bar here too.
You can't generalize over a billion people like this.
Of course you can. The issue is not that such generalizations are invalid, but what conclusions to draw from them and what actions to take in response.
Also note that I have a black friend^W^W Muslim roommate (in fact a Hafiz) I get along well with. That does not mean I don't consider Islam as it presents itself today on a global scale a dangerous ideology.
For example, there are many Muslim-majority states that have had multiple women as heads of state.
And how many out gay politicians are there in such countries? And anecdotally speaking, remember what happened to Benazir Bhutto.
> At least 48 people have been killed stateside by right-wing
> extremists in the 14 years since since the September 11
> attacks -- almost twice as many as were killed by
> self-identified jihadists in that time.
As Jacques says, "terrorist" attacks are only committed by a Muslim majority because we re-define any attack committed by a non-Muslim as "not terrorism."
Are you actually going to put some lone nut jobs here and there on the same level as organized and determined jihadists? If so, you need to include the tens of thousands of murdered people that ISIS has been responsible for. You'll need to include the Russian jet that was blown up, the attack in Paris, and all those killed by al-qaeda on 9/11, etc.
You'll also need to explain why the FBI terrorist list doesn't show that the government has a similar concern for white supremacists.
This is at least in part due to their bad habit of depending on the partisan SPLC for "hate group" data. SPLC is in the business of making so-called "hate groups" into terrible bogeymen, because SPLC reaps significant financial rewards through scare-tactics fundraising the depends on the threat of such groups.
We define away the problem. White people shooting others is not usually considered terrorism (such as a mass shooting committed by a white person). Terrorism is used to label actions by people you don't like. Some politicians even make statements calling the president a terrorist because he does something they don't like. We don't call it terrorism when the American government kidnapped people, took them to other countries, and let them be tortured (rendition); I do think that was not only wrong but was something you could use the T word for.
White people shooting others is not usually considered terrorism
If those white people were part of a religious movement indiscriminately targeting the larger society, then of course they would be labeled "terrorists". Do you have an example of where I'm wrong?
calling the president a terrorist
If you'll recall, the White House referred to the GOP as suicide bombers over debt ceiling negotiations. That's political posturing when either side does it and has little to do with legitimate use of the word "terrorists" in the context of labeling organizations seeking to maximize loss of life and destruction through surprise attacks on civilians.
Most mass murderers' manifestos are political in nature. Whether anyone pays attention or remembers is pretty much the defining characteristic between calling one event mass murder versus calling it terrorism.
As a citizen of the US, I prefer to talk about my own country, since I have more historical context. And 9/11 was a one-time event that hasn't and can't happen again, now that we've done things like reinforce pilot's doors. Removing outliers is a pretty common thing.
Furthermore, it makes sense to start post-9/11 since "we're in a different world now" and all that rhetoric that politicians have been spewing since. This is about today's political context, where 9-11 was the defining moment.
This series has been really great. It's significantly more accessible than many other OS dev tutorials I've read in the past. I spent all day yesterday with a friend and the first few posts, it was such a good time. Nothing like seeing a machine boot up and print something, and know that you wrote 100% of the source code that makes it happen. Even with a tutorial, it's magic.
Rust doesn't really have traditional OOP, so yeah, a lot of it does go out the window.
Rust doesn't have some Scala features like Higher Kinded Types that lead to this kind of perception, so it's not quite the same. Our type system can be hard for totally different reasons ;). The borrow checker stuff.