• 0 Posts
  • 24 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: November 26th, 2023

help-circle




  • If you’re poor then you’re basically mentally ill.

    I couldn’t afford anxiety/depression meds and went to a professional. Literally told me, almost verbatim, “I don’t think you’re a danger to anyone or yourself, but I’m going to put you down as 5150. After a holding period you’ll get medicine.”

    Thought about it, decided no as I didn’t want to screw up my background checks just to get medicine.

    “Well I already put it down.”

    I didn’t want to fight my way through two guards (though I wish I would have tried) so I had to go through a shitty, depressing, and degrading experience. And I couldn’t afford the medicine they prescribed me. The entire point of lying to game the system, the entire point of fucking me while acting like a savior, and I couldn’t even get medicine.

    So yeah. Tagged as being a danger to myself or others because I didn’t have money to buy medicine… and a mental health professional thought she figured out a lifehack and tested it on a real person.









  • It’s new to me, I think it’s saying that your system is built up by you declaring what you want in a file, a single source that everything comes from.

    It’s atomic because each action the system takes is carefully completed rather than bailing out and requiring you to fix something.

    It’s immutable meaning you declare how you want things to be set up and then critical changes stem from those declarations and nothing else. You would obviously generate preferences, save data, etc. but the files that make the system / packages work are carefully locked.

    It’s like the concept of flatpaks + structured system defining + modern common sense OS operations?



  • You use lifetimes to annotate parameters and return values in order to tell the compiler about how long things must last for your function to be valid. You can link a specific input with the output, or explicitly separate them. If you don’t give lifetimes the language uses some basic rules to do it for you. If it can’t, eg it’s ambiguous, then it’s a compile error and you need to do it manually.

    It’s one of the harder concepts of rust to explain succinctly. But imagine you had a function that took strA and strB, used strB to find a subsection of strA, and then return a slice of strA. That slice is tied to strA. You would use 'a annotation for strA and the return value, and 'b for strB.

    Rust compiler will detect the lifetime being shorter than expected.


    Also, ownership semantics. Think c++ move semantics. Only one person is left with a good value, the previous owners just have garbage data they can’t use anymore. If you created a thing on the heap and then gave it away, you wouldn’t have it anymore to free at the end. If you want to have “multiple owners” then you need ref counting and such, which also stops this problem of premature freeing.


    Edit: one more thing: reference rules. You can have many read-only references to a thing, or one mutable reference. Unless you’re doing crazy things, the compiler simply won’t let you have references to a thing, and then via one of those references free that thing, thereby invalidating the other references.


  • I’m someone who grew up on Windows but switched to Linux and holy shit was it so much nicer. I don’t know if Windows massively improved or if people are just incapable of comparing something new with something they already know. Because Windows is hard.

    99/100 basic users need someone to unfuck their windows install after what, one, two years?

    Every time you need to do something non standard you’re basically going from training wheels to “good luck, deputy sysadmin.”

    Broken registry. Orphaned cruft.

    Malware, spyware.


  • mhague@lemmy.worldtoShowerthoughts@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It’s because cigarettes are addicting and so when someone harming themselves says not to do it, it makes sense. They’re suffering from a bad habit / addiction and they’re saying others shouldn’t do it too.

    Someone proclaiming the virtues of simple living yet the way they got there being unobtainable for anyone hearing the advice makes no sense.

    They’re both hypocrites on the surface but only one survives scrutiny.