Readit NewsI don't doubt the boards could've been sold cheaper, but they clearly were doing something right given how much it changed the hobbyist landscape
You want chip-specific libraries. When the software is designed for the hardware everything works better.
The native AVR and esp-IDF frameworks are very good. There's also micropython and circuit python. I've heard good things, but I don't partake in Python.
Personally I think attempting to provide a cross-platform library for microcontrollers is an enormous mistake. This is not x86, you can't rely on any CPU feature existing, which results in awful branching code in places that in a sane framework is a single instruction updating a CPU register
I'm not saying it's not a real or an easy problem, just that I wonder if it truly is the reason Arduino is "bad"
The questions were pretty much unlike anything I've ever asked an LLM though, is this how people use LLMs nowadays?
So now even more space is wasted, making interfaces harder to use, but yes, the less important metric "how much time does it take on first use to spot a button" will shoot through the roof of you make the button full screen width (10x faster!). Thought it will fail to capture the more important metric of time wasted scrolling since a simple message doesn't fully fit on screen
And of course there are no user customizations to rectify these usability errors...
PS A great example of this awesomeness in action: on https://m3.material.io/components/toolbars/guidelines they can't even fit 2 (two!) toolbar buttons fully because the huge left/right buttons and all the extra white space padding and margins prevent the button content from being seen.
But there is enough space to fit all 4 (or at least 3 depending on text size and icons) toolbar buttons, and even if one doesn’t fit fully you could show its partial text, so navigation would still be faster without having to press the scroll button first and then the toolbar button
As for the article, I'm also a bit confused because I'm really not sure whether people write that sort of code at the beginning "very commonly" - match and `ok_or` to handle None by turning them into proper Errors is one of the first things you learn in Rust.
I make no claims that commercial VPNs are more secure, but at least they have some level of interest in keeping their promises if people are paying them, whereas a free service does not carry the same incentive.
Pick your poison, I guess.
Cool, sounds like an organization that is heavily incentivized to make their communication hard to intercept and eavesdrop on.
start = gettime()
variable_time_crypto_operation()
end = gettime()
sleep(1sec - (end - start)) // Use a loop if necessary here
(I say virtually, because even constant time crypto isn't bulletproof - GoFetch, a recent Apple M-series CPU vulnerability inadvertently broke the "constant" part because of a quirk of the prefetcher. Side channels are hard, no need to make it harder.)
The reason proposed is that if the environment is loud, you won't be bothered by additional noise from the fans.
I'm just wondering, why hasn't a SBC-based alternative popped up yet? I think the project is/was awesome, I actually did maintain 2 public PirateBoxen for a while. Is it a simple lack of interest? The fact LibraryBox tried to pick up after PirateBox kind of suggests otherwise. I feel like it's actually easier now than ever to build a Libary/PirateBox-like project (although I do imagine an on-board network card probably has way worse performance than even those old portable routers).
I've even tried to put together an image like that in the past but I couldn't find a reproducible solution for creating raspi images so that put me off, maybe it's time to give it another try...
Wait, what? Anthropic makes money by getting you to buy and expend tokens. The last thing they want is for you to get the right answer as fast as possible. They want you to sometimes get the right answer unpredictably, but with enough likelihood that this time will work that you keep hitting Enter.
In an environment where providers are almost entirely interchangeable and tiniest of perceived edges (because there's still no benchmark unambiguously judging which model is "better") make or break user retention, I just don't see how it's not ludicrous on its face that any LLM provider would be incentivized to give unreliable answers at some high-enough probability.