sus

It's just the paradox of tolerance again. Too much freedom causes a power vacuum, which almost inevitably causes some small but determined authoritarian group to gobble up that power until they get so big they can overthrow the whole system. And then you're back to square one, except now the system is probably fascist.

this summary doesn't have some information that is pretty critical if you want to compare it to the meme

Searches for that simple 3-torus have come up empty. But scientists haven’t yet searched for some 3-torus variations. For example, the sides of the cube might be twisted relative to one another. In such a universe, exiting the top of the cube would bring you back to the bottom, but rotated by, for example, 180 degrees.

So to ruin thine dreams, a summary:

Season 10 was in 1998

A "donut-shaped" universe (3-torus) was proposed in 1984 (the paper also points out it's the simplest finite 3d topology, so it's probably been considered even earlier)

This article talks about more complicated "donut shapes" that haven't been ruled out before

This is not a joke. If you don't wake up at 4 am to start harassing windows users, you will never become a GNU/Linux Trillionaire.

Paychecks? I am a self-made billionaire, all thanks to the Free Software Grindset

there was only space for 5 things ( *** Debloat Mindset *** )

Considering this was written in 2001, I'm not all that worried

a shadow is just a silhouette cast on a surface, so it can move much faster than light. An object moving near the speed of light in front of a small light source that casts a shadow on a very large, very distant object could appear to move billions of times faster than light (though you would need an extremely bright light source for the shadow to be noticeable to the naked eye)

there's really no upper limit, just how far you're willing to stretch the definition of "shadow" and "movement"

Nokia bought the parent company of bell labs in 2016. By that point bell labs had already been completely restructured to the point that it has basically nothing to do with the historical bell labs.

yeah rust along other new languages takes package management (and some other "hard learned lessons") seriously, which gives it an advantage over most older languages (and it's ahead other newer languages in that there is a serious amount of adoption for rust.. a package manager that has no packages to manage is not very useful)

You can, of course. And if you're good enough at it, and focus on keeping it simple, you can keep the complexity down to a minimum, at least with most straightforward programs.

Buut you can say the same about other complicated languages like c++. And things like writing quick "shell script" type things are going to be pretty simple in almost every decent language. Even if the result is slightly more verbose it won't really matter.

eh, I'd say rust's problem is more that it's marketed as a general-purpose language, when in reality it is rare for software to need a language that is both very highly performant and memory safe, and rust makes heavy sacrifices in terms of complexity to achieve that. Most popular languages are garbage collected which can cause performance problems, but makes code much simpler to read and write.

found a few examples of how to do it on a github issue:

var script = GDScript.new()
script.source_code = "func say_hello():\n\tprint(\"Hello!\")"
script.reload()
var script_instance = script.new()
script_instance.call("say_hello")

var MyClass = load("myclass.gd")
var instance = MyClass.new()
assert(instance.get_script() == MyClass)