Pathetically hypocritical to use AI to write this blog post when generic copy editors have been hit way harder by AI than programmers.
Readit NewsDeleted Comment
yalue commented on I started programming when I was 7. I'm 50 now and the thing I loved has changed jamesdrandall.com/posts/t... · Posted by u/jamesrandall
yalue commented on The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button paulmakeswebsites.com/wri... · Posted by u/dbushell
15 years ago, Enterprise FizzBuzz [1] was supposed to be satire. These days, it's not quite complex enough to capture "modern" web dev.
[1] https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...
For a long time, windows had two options:
1. Update and restart and prompt for bitlocker password and update and restart and prompt for bitlocker password and restart
2. Update and restart and prompt for bitlocker password and update and restart and prompt for bitlocker password and shut down (and restart)
Finally, they fixed the last bit of option 2
Deleted Comment
Microsoft Go? I've used Go on windows for years now and this is the first I've heard of this fork. So it only exists because microsoft wants to have a crypto package that complies with an arbitrary regulation? Is there a reason that a better package requires a fork of the entire runtime rather than just, say, a normal Go package? It sounds like it requires cgo to call into third-party libraries, but that's already a common practice in "normal" Go libraries.
One thing I do appreciate is how the relevant issue in the upstream Go repo says: "A number of companies must comply with them, for example as part of a broader FedRAMP compliance posture. (If that's not you, you can ignore this. Run!)" [1]
Apparently I'm just not the target audience. Sounds like I'm correct in assuming it's security theater at best, and an avenue for new backdoors at worst.
yalue commented on Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico twitter.com/SpaceX/status... · Posted by u/thepasswordis
Can someone explain why reentry must be so hellish? The energy gained during the rocket burn into orbit must be bled off during reentry, and that energy is enormous. However, why must reentry occur so quickly? It seems if the descent into the atmosphere was slower, the heat shield would be able to radiate the heat energy away more effectively, thus lowering skin temperatures, and significantly reducing the engineering challenge.
The velocity of a spacecraft in low earth orbit is over 15,000 miles per hour. Smashing into the atmosphere is perhaps the most fuel- and cost-efficient way to slow down to a speed at which landing is possible.
yalue commented on The roller ship was not an effective way to cross the high seas hackaday.com/2024/03/27/t... · Posted by u/Stratoscope
Heh, so it's an 1897 version of what this guy on youtube attempted with a monster truck with mild success: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohxGA7fpfu0 (warning: extremely redneck)
Deleted Comment
yalue commented on Experiments on a $50 DIY air purifier you can make in 30s dynomight.net/2020/12/15/... · Posted by u/throwup238
One thing the article doesn't seem to mention is noise. I've found that the "actual" air purifiers seem to be much quieter than box fans. Perhaps if you had greater control over the box fan's speed you could get the noise down to a comparable level, but I doubt the cheap type of fan used in the article is capable of such a thing.