Have some air at the top of the top reservoir, assuming that the top reservoir is at most about 10 m deep in water (to avoid damage from storms). Or have the air in separate chambers fixed to the top reservoir.
It's WASM. WASM runs in a sandbox and you can't have UB on the hardware level. Imagine someone exploiting the behavior of some browser when UB is triggered. Except that the programmer is not having nasal demons [1] but some poor user, like a mom of four children in Abraska running a website on her cell phone.
The UB in this case is "you may get another value in the sandboxed memory region if you dereference an invalid pointer, rather than a guaranteed trap". You can still have UB even in a sandbox.
Seems like they got overly attached to the guaranteed trapping they got on 32-bit and wanted to keep it even though it's totally not worth the cost of bounds checking every pointer access. Save the trapping for debug mode only.
Ah, so you meant UB = unspecified behavior, not UB = undefined behavior.
Maybe. Bugs that come from spooky behavior at a distance are notoriously hard to debug, especially in production, and it's worthwile to pay for it to avoid that.
I don't understand all consequences yet, except one, that the wealthy and powerful object to it because it hurts them and so the Land Value Tax is rarely introduced. Even if it gets introduced, it will abolished soon thereafter.
Yes! He was a very clear thinker. Refreshing when you find someone who manages to see things as they are, right in front of you the whole time, independent of the numbing filter of unexamined cultural momentum.
--
> the wealthy and powerful object to it
The poor, whose property to land ratio is high (even if they individually own very little in absolute terms), subsidize the rich whose property to land ratio is low (even if in absolute terms they own more). And it compounds, because this makes land, like Bitcoin, a place to park money and reap the rewards of other people's growing population demand for something limited, and other people's investment in development. So housing for anyone but the rich becomes more and more of a financial challenge. And market warping mechanisms are tried, like rent freezes, etc. But somehow, simply taxing the precious limited resource (land) more, and dropping the tax on developing useful property on land, which is what is required to increase housing, rarely gets tried. And as you say, quickly gets reversed when it happens.
So many ways the poor, middle class, and not so rich, pay the taxes of the very rich.
And the very rich do a very good job of framing things, so the want-to-be rich believe they need to keep things that way -- to their own, and everyone else's, detriment.
AI is one sharp tool cutting slices from the old internet. But perpetrators have used different tools from the start: SEO spam, algorithmic feeds, embrace/extend/extinguish, building moats, the attention economy, and many others. AI is just the next newfangled sharp tool.
In other words, I don't think that AI is killing the web.
It's being profit-oriented and running amok in an unleashed way. It's prisoner's dilemma. You know, if you don't do it then someone else will do it and you lose. Enshittification is one consequence. The internet experienced it from the beginning. But only about fifteen years ago companies learnt how to squeeze the last drop out and, like in the tragedy of the commons, everybody is worse off.
And what's the most catastrophic? People are confused. They look at the tools but not at some famous people behind these rampages. Of course as leaders they just optimize the hell out of the internet with the target that their companies thrive. But in doing so they cause heavy damage.
Maybe. Maybe not. Given the human material (yes I know a dehumanizing formulation, but that's what Corporate does) it seems it's better not to step on anybody's toes except if it's abundantly clear that the person doesn't have a voice in things, but even then it's risky. Corporate is self-selecting: companies that don't generate profit die off sooner or later. Therefore we can conclude (if a bit shakily) from the norm in Corporate not to insult anybody that internal strife has been very damaging and therefore that Corporate self-selects in an evolutionary manner to avoid anything that leads to internal strife.
I wouldn't say it has a good function on its own, but rather it's a mitigation strategy. People's fragile egos are a fact and this is not going to change anytime soon. So if you want to have a big organization, eventually you'll need to accommodate those who can't tolerate anything even remotely offending. Only organizations that aren't focused on growth can afford having a personality.
> eventually you'll need to accommodate those who can't tolerate anything even remotely offending.
Nah, I don't want these people in my company. Speaking specifically, to be clear, of people who can't tolerate polite, precise correction. If I can't find enough reasonable people to grow, then that's fine. But honestly I think there are fewer of those people than you might think, given the right environment where (among other psychological safety factors) being proven wrong is fine and normal and genuinely does not require a counter attack.
I know. I said critical function for a reason. If you can remove it, it's not critical.
The point is, "but evolution" is a weak argument to justify any particular feature of an entity facing selection pressure. The laryngeal nerve detour would have been a better example but I wanted to stay accessible.
Another way: Let ferment it to the max. If fermentation doesn't consume all the sugar, then it's somewhat stable.
Ancient wines also had resins added. Today these would probably have tasted almost medicinal, but often they are diluted before serving. Wine dilution is still a custom in some parts of Italy. I was invited to a party in Tuscany and they served a lot of Lambrusco amabile and for the children they diluted it and because Lambrusco amabile is rather sweet it was a little bit an oldfashioned soft drink. I tried it, too, and it's refreshing. I don't know whether it's sacrilegous but as one says, in Rome do as Romans do.
But that won't help for long. If the Amdash becomes popular, then AI will pick it up, because "am-" is just a text fragment and AI can learn to produce it.
Even worse if a future version of Unicode adopts the Amdash, then nothing will stop AI.
Or the opposite happens as one already said here: Nobody will use the Amdash.
According to Unicode's tenets, if it was used to any great degree then they are obligated to support it, are they not? Their mission is to make it possible to encode any writing glyph humans have ever used to communicate in writing or so I thought.
Yes, there's an obvious negative feedback loop to the effectiveness of this. The designer can't have realised that all symbols are just as opaque as any others to an LLM.
Autism is seen as a large and wide spectrum of many different symptoms all called "autism". Using terms like "high functioning autism" is probably not a helpful way to talk about some color on the spectrum, however.
Because it creates a binary when a) it's a spectrum and b) high/low functioning dichotomy is not a constant. Every day needs can be different. Sometimes people are low functioning during child hood and become more functioning into adulthood. Sometimes high functioning autistic people become low functioning later in life. Some people can function very well when they had adequate support but the can't function at all when support levels fall below a threshold.
Reducing the conversation to high/low functioning also limits people's understanding and compassion of autistic people. The sibling commenter to you said they believe high functioning autistic people don't deserve to have a say over matters concerning autistic people, which is incredibly troubling because that just becomes and avenue for silencing autistic people; if having the ability to speak up for yourself means your opinion isn't valid, then that gives license to use and abuse a population, as autistic people often are.
