I’m referring to use of process (sometimes with a partial assist from qualified tools, of which Rust is NOT one) for safety assurance, not the language. As is done in safety and security critical embedded contexts. eg DO-178, Common Criteria, etc.
They weren’t “my” cubic fractals in the mid-90s any more than Paul “created” a fractal out of z^3/(z^3+1) + c in 2020. Pretty pictures on his blog are fine, giving it a name and attributing himself as its “creator” when this was well-explored decades earlier with better renderings is the hubris.
That is some hubris for Paul to claim to have “created” this fractal in December 2020. Yes he coded up and rendered some nice images from this particular function. But this class of rational maps in complex dynamics has been studied by actual mathematicians for decades and there are many extremely similar visualizations. It’s a nice little exercise but there’s very minimal real original contribution that deserves attribution here.
You could render this in Fractint in DOS just by plugging that function in, I explored many similar cubic fractals with Fractint back in the mid-90s. And would have earlier if my parents could have afforded a 386 before then. It was released in 1988.
But this isn’t about websites or just publishing articles or the weather. It’s about web applications, commerce, products, things with customers not just readers. As soon as you have an application that’s doing anything nontrivial then you have to draw a line and say “nope we’re not supporting that at all” and there’s sections along the line where you can’t even fail gracefully.
In the real world that means there is a list of browsers and versions tested on.
Completely bad faith reply when your example uses zero CSS, no HTML links even, and the only script to distinguish it from a bare static text document is google analytics malware. This isn’t falling back, it is the fallback. Expecting most modern web application to function at that level is for most purposes, simply stupid. Like putting hitching posts in a high rise apartment’s sub-basement parking levels.
Oh it’s possible and people
do it in embedded all the time at great expense, but that safety isn’t assured by using a “safe” language, it comes from the requirements, documentation and verification process. OpenBSD’s kernel was developed with security in mind but not that level of safety.
It didn’t even exist half a year ago and there is zero in the title or the linked markdown file to give any context at all as to what this “Pi” actually is or what telegram integration with “Pi” is supposed to accomplish or even any link to the upstream project.
Given the ridiculously generic singleton “Pi” name this is just foolishness. It’s all the chutzpah of Musk renaming twitter X, except instead of already being the most influential product launched by the richest man in the world it’s an open source project launched a few months ago.
Not necessarily. Rust safety relies on OS primitives and the error here is in an OS primitive itself (kernel semaphores).
Yes Rust is one language that can be widely deployed in systems programming and potentially avoid classes of memory and ownership errors. No it doesn’t magically solve all the problems. Saying “Rust would fix this” in a hypothetical situation where Rust existed in 1995 or OpenBSD was rewritten from scratch, ok, well maybe. As of today only research kernels and a very small fraction of Linux systems have been written in Rust when we are talking about kernels.
People without systems and embedded programming experience need to sit down.
Much like many cameras process and discard the RAW sensor data after processing to pixel data if not further compressing and discarding the processed pixel data to a lossy image format, even more so the raw BAM sequencing read data is vastly larger than processed VCF files. Even many companies that retain that data are liable to archive it offline rather than keep the raw reads permanently accessible online. There are real costs involved and a business case is needed for keeping that data. Especially with a decent privacy policy or regulations storing 100G or multiples of that online for free and downloading on demand is a significant compared to the entire cost of sequencing.
The whole premise of the article is fallacious analogies and mixed metaphors.
Yes a restaurant that poisons 2% of its customers is a bad restaurant. A restaurant that has nothing for people who are strict kosher, strict halal, strict vegan, or have severe multiple food allergies is not a bad restaurant. There may be 5% of people who simply can’t eat there because the kitchen cooks pork and there’s peanut shells on the ground but their idiosyncratic requirements don’t dictate the experience of the other 95%. Or 90%, or what have you.
This goes to show you’ve never been anywhere near the actual development cycle of a real-world front-end web application. “So, there is a baseline "target subset of HTML/CSS" that gives you 100% coverage.” Oh really? Which subset? Which “HTML/CSS?” And 100%? Absolutely laughable.
Seems like you’re getting hate but this is how the world works. Uber just has to support the devices that their market uses. And especially for visas the government is free to make the public bend to whatever arbitrary requirements they develop for using their byzantine systems.
I would say it’s the opposite. coreutils is core utils, you cannot write shell scripts without them, they are widely and almost unavoidably used in trusted environments. They are also relatively simple.
With ffmpeg, anyone who knows anything about secure application development in the past 20 years knows that it is a huge security tarpit and throwing it untrusted inputs in trusted environment is asking to be owned. You thoroughly sandbox that shit. That’s true for all untrusted media conversion, but absolutely with ffmpeg.