I'm so tired of "smart" tech. I don't want my TV, or fridge, or dryer or anything connecting to wifi and bluetooth and having an app to manage settings. It's hard to believe there's demand for any of these terrible "features". The peak of smart tech were watches you could do math on.
> generics were a slippery slope. give it a decade and Go will be indistinguishable from c++
Lib boost will have conquered every language by then!!! :D
Jokes aside, generics are unusable in a lot of languages due to their syntax choices. In Go we kinda have the problem that there's no real templating and no real macros, so they're even harder to use.
But I agree somewhat, generics feels to me like an anti pattern in Go.
Also, the way the Go core/stdlib is written, it makes generics so unnecessarily painful to debug. Why they decided to have definitions like "~C" or "~[]S" is beyond me. No human knows what the resulting compile time error means. They should have named these things "Comparable" or "Slicable" or whatever is more expressive. Just stop with this stupid single letter shit.
Generics themselves maybe not. Generic methods probably yes. What people want generic methods for is to do deeply nested call chains that were never typical of Go. And if you have deeply nested calls you'll need some way to deal with errors in deeply nested calls, and then a short function syntax to pass to behavior inside those deeply nested calls. Give it a few years and everyone will be writing the same functional slop in Go that they are writing in every other language.
> What people want generic methods for is to do deeply nested call chains
I don't see that as the only use of generic methods.
The example in the article is a "Map" method that transforms e.g. a List[A] to a List[B], by taking a function that takes an A and returns a B. To be able to transform a list like that is a useful operation.
It was possible to do the same with a global function like MapList but the syntax is nicer if you use methods. You don't need the type in the name (function MapList vs method Map) and it is an operation on the List after all so list.Map(..) is nicer than MapList(list, ..).
The generic methods that have been added are essentially just syntax sugar. You can now use method syntax in cases where you could equivalently define a function. They’re not the fundamental extension to the type system that some people have been asking for (and probably will never get, because there’d be no reasonable way to implement it).
Not here against Generic methods, but I feel the Go team is in a mid-age crisis where they lack of new things to do to prove themselves. See their iterators mini-drama not long ago?
I feel the sumtype/emum/routine demanders should yell a little harder so Go team can find their purpose again.
Cloudflare is junk. Their entire billion dollar service can't distinguish my (DAILY) GET request to mainstream news sites from bot traffic, nothing they say or do is of any value. I've had the same IP for decades.
Have you checked your IP address's reputation with a service such as ipqualityscore.com? If cloudflare thinks your traffic is bot traffic, it's likely that there is bot traffic you don't know about coming from your IP, either from a compromised device on your network or a sketchy VPN product.
Also, it doesnt apply to this person if they've had the same IP for years but if your ISP rotates IPs frequently (mine does everytime I reset modem) or you use 5G and CGNAT is being used, its almost a garuntee that your proxy has been labled as having been used by a residential proxy network.
So many people have sketchy TV boxes or whatever other sketchy IOT decice that is a larp for using your network to sell bandwidth to proxy networks.
However, CF is unnecessarily making people on 5G connections from desktops do turnstiles as it looks like a scraper using a mobile proxy. This will become more and more of an issue as more laptops have 5G modems in them. Not sute how this WAF IP fingerprinting model survives widesprear CGNAT. I guess it will be an excuse to more intensly fingerprint us.
>However, CF is unnecessarily making people on 5G connections from desktops do turnstiles as it looks like a scraper using a mobile proxy. This will become more and more of an issue as more laptops have 5G modems in them.
What makes you think this is the cause, rather than something more straightforward like: CGNAT means more users are sharing IPs, and there's a higher chance that the IP pool gets contaminated by bad behavior? Apparently cloudflare tries to detect CGNAT pools and give them more leeway, but at the same time they can't give them unlimited leeway.
That could be the case, but Im just speaking from my experience I find I get way more turnstiles when using a 5G modem or proxying through my phone. Whatever they're doing, its not reducing collateral damage.
Some people think they're providing value. They do block some bot traffic (at the cost of many many false positives) and I'll bet that they're providing endless amounts of data to one or more three letter agencies. They also provide lots of value to scammers who use cloudflare to protect their phishing and malware pushing webpages from automated systems that would detect/report them while also making sure visitors have JS enabled so their browser exploits work.
It can be worse; they randomly block my uptime monitoring with 4xx and 5xx status codes once in two months or something like that, despite nothing changing.
Elaborate. Are you getting turnstile challenges? Or blocked entirely? Are you using a weird browser configuration or non-mainstream browser? Do you have extensions that lie about your software/hardware configuration?
That could be plausible deniability. I mean, CF is in fact keeping a tab on who is visiting which websites. Between them and Google, these two companies know everything about everyone.
This is sort of hilarious if you think about it. The Firefox browser is completely written in Rust. Now Ladybird is a "human-directed ai" Rust browser. Makes you wonder how much of the code the two browsers will share going forward given llm assisted autocompletes will pull from the same Rust Browser dataset.
Only a small portion of Firefox is written in Rust. Apparently some of the most performant and least buggy parts are those in Rust, but again, only parts like the CSS engine.
Probably not much: the requirement is exact equivalence of program inputs to outputs, and as such the agents are performing very mechanical translation from the existing C++ code to Rust. Their prompts aren't "implement X browser component in rust", they're "translate this C++ code to Rust, with these extra details that you can't glean from the code itself."
My wife was complaining about her Windows 11 laptop crashing. I tried everything and even did fresh installs. Still crashing (and honestly pretty slow). I gave up on Windows and installed Ubuntu and Chromium for her. She can instagram, facebook, save her memes, and its all fast. No crashes. She's a happy camper now. I think a lot of (even) non technical people would like Linux a lot more than they realize if they gave it a shot.
man fuck canada and the usa. how are we the only ones in the world to not care about safety. even if its a 0.5% chance 150+ people die, isn't that enough to warrant temporarily grounding a handful of planes. sigh common
I recently discovered I score very low on VVIQ. Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire. I don't have full on Aphantasia. But listening to how for other people reading a book is like watching a movie in their heads blows my mind. Being able to imagine with any level of depth sounds pretty amazing. As a kid I never really played pretend or was into fiction. But I'm curious that possibly long form reading is on the decline is associated with lower abilities to imagine in the general public?
FWIW, I love reading and fiction, but am also quite low on vividness. Imagination never really equally visual images to me, I can still imagine scenes without seeing them, if that makes sense.
Poetry, on the other hand....there are some types I like, but there are certain poems that seem to be made only to make imagery. Can't get into much of it.
I'm similar. I spent my childhood cycling through endless numbers of used fiction paperbacks, but my visual imagination caps out at, roughly, "somebody making a watercolor painting without any small brushes". I can manage more than that, but only with extensive repetition and basically memorizing a particular image by rote.
Oh wow, I didn't know that was a thing but that describes me perfectly. I can sort of picture faces to some extent, but trying to visualize a house or a scene is almost impossible to me. I find it frustrating when trying to think of a "memory palace" because I can't even think about what the front door of the palace would look like, let along intricate places for things within it.
That's really interesting! I'm probably just using my lack of visual imagination as a cop out. Do you have any examples of resources for constructing such a "memory palace"?
A trick with the memory palace is to use place you know well such as your bedroom.
Then, with practice, you will learn how to build image that are vivid to your mind and easier to remember (it is perfectly normal if at first you build images that are not easily retained, you will learn from the image you do retain).
I mean, the level of CGI and game engine textures we have is almost indistinguishable from real life. Perhaps because we have access to the super high-fidelity, interactive simulations, we've lost the practice of imagining so vividly?
I grew up with unlimited screen time starting at age 2 and used the majority of it to play 3d video games. I score very high on the VVIQ.
My story is antidotal, but your hypothesis is also not backed by data. I'd like to purpose a counter hypothesis: spending time in interactive 3d worlds requires building internal maps of the environment. Exercising these portions of the brain improves Visual Imagery Vividness.
There are lots of unforeseen consequences of screen time. I suspect this isn't one of them.
This is the fear as I watch my 6-yr old son enjoy oodles of video time. But what to do? Create an equally damaging anxiety of self-denial? What an age, for better or for worse.
As someone who's always had limited visualization ability, I feel kind of offended that you're labeling this like a personal failing. I have to imagine someone with full-blown aphantasia would be even more upset.
reply