lambalicious

The internet is in support of qualified murder: in this case, in defense of society. Such is the difference between things in real life, and trying to reduce the context to a simple noun is nonindicatve, disruptive and usually precedes arguments on bad faith. Such as your text, where you make a number of slippages and bad faith arguments such as equating a murder for rights to "a world of vigilantism".

So, "Assy"?

While I do favour that UI improvements are needed - in particular for guest views and community sidebars, I'd say defo chasing the "big social" trends and UIs is not the way to go. Heck, I left Reddit partly because of the new UI (I know about old.reddit, it's just there's no promise of any kind to maintain it).

Intense training program, in the blind

They take away all medication, including pain medication

Intentionally and empathetically ignore your symptoms and tell you to just go with it, as if it was how we treat mental patients

Intentionally will not fix the underlying causes

"World class" "doctors" and behavioural theorists

So basically, they torture you until you accept the pain and just take it, rather than seeking out an actual solution?

Wow, that defintively would inspire me to kill a health CEO. Or, in this case, a health theorist.

no no no no, I prefer the current status of things to anything blockchain.

holaaaaaaaa mundoooooo

I hope this teaches them the valuable lesson of always having domains with more than one registrar.

Or, hopefully, we migrate to a system more advanced than DNS registrars where your "name" can be taken down by an unrelated third party. The current system sucks and the fact that even the Fediverse relies on it (accounts are tied to domains, making full account migration impossible) makes even the remains of my pre-graduate CS student brain rumble.

I don’t want to, BUT companies are supposed to make efforts to protect their IP or they run the risk of losing those exclusive protections when it matters later on (abandonment).

My understanding is that 1.- they are not forced to defend against every possible case of trademark usage 2.- they are not obligated by law to be jerks about it and 3.- this applies to trademark only, not copyright or patents.

Fair point, he literally got it at just a finger's length to destruction.

Might recall wrong but Frodo did not destroy the One Ring, didn't he? He tried to protect it and use it but tripped on a meat-hungry Gollum at the last second.

Consider, say, the printf family of functions. The side-effect of their invocation is quite notorious and clear: print something to the screen, or write it to a file, etc. This kind of thing is not expressable (and should not be expressed as) as a return type. But these functions do have a return value: a status code indicating whether the write-to-medium was successful or else why. It's so easy to discard this information and end up eg.: ignorin a write that didn't happen because there was not enough room, or writing more bytes than the destination buffer could afford to take (hellooooo, buffer overflow!).

There are lots of functions (probably entire categories, but I'm not that strong on type theory) where the "result" is vastly different from the "return" or can not be expressed as such. Foremost cases I can come up with are I/O, stuff on complex types where types also represent actions or components with side effects (eg.: GUIs), and pretty much anything about inserting or removing elements from containers. In those cases, if the two things differ but the return is also important, it'd be nice to have a mechanism to make sure that it can't be accidentally ignored (explicit, intentional ignoring is fine; that's what we have (void)(expr...) in the language).

Another reason for having this capability is having a function with a composite return-result type, such as a std::expected<T,E> where you want to help make sure the composition is handled correctly by the caller.

ISRAEL would like to: know its location.