I agree that this could be viewed as bad. However, this is way less of an issue than Google taking choice away, which is what the great-grandparent comment was about.
> you get the natural numbers, the integers, ... but even before the natural numbers come the prime numbers. Primes are the most fundamental set of numbers in mathematics, from which you can generate the natural numbers.
I don't really see how you can define prime numbers before the natural numbers.
> They also say openly that they cooperate with everyone to take down certain illegal material from channels and open groups.
Can you provide a link for that? I could only find that they'd hand over your personal account info if they get a court order claiming that you're a terror suspect (from https://telegram.org/privacy):
> 8.3. Law Enforcement Authorities
> If Telegram receives a court order that confirms you're a terror suspect, we may disclose your IP address and phone number to the relevant authorities. So far, this has never happened. When it does, we will include it in a semiannual transparency report published at: https://t.me/transparency.
What does "targeting any glibc version" mean? Is it the solution to the problem where you have to compile on an ancient Debian version to produce a binary that works on all Linux distributions because it otherwise links to too-new symbol versions in glibc?
Can I use that outside of Zig, for compiling C++ code?
I think the friction of wheels is lower when the wheels lock up vs when they go with the speed of the road.
From Wikipedia[1]:
> Kinetic friction, also known as dynamic friction or sliding friction, occurs when two objects are moving relative to each other and rub together (like a sled on the ground). The coefficient of kinetic friction is typically denoted as μk, and is usually less than the coefficient of static friction for the same materials.[40][41]
> So the WhatsApp AI can arbitrarily decide to unencrypt your chats and send them for review.
Where do you read the "decide to unencrypt your chats" part? I could only find that they have to decide based on the unencrypted parts of a WhatsApp profile plus other unencrypted data.
> So anyone who believes that NAT is something that provides security is delusional.
If I understand NATs correctly, they cannot route incoming connections (from the Internet) to a computer on the local network because they don't know which computer to route them to. Hence incoming connections will always fail (unless configured to go to a specific computer, "port forwarding"). Thus a NAT (by design, because it cannot operate in another fashion), blocks incoming connections. I'd think this is a security benefit (over having a public IP address for every device in the network like in IPv6, but without a firewall).
Care to elaborate why my example doesn't work/misses your point?