I quite agree with the overall point but can we leave this kind of discourse on X, please? It doesn't add much, it just feels caustic for effect and engagement farming.

> While there are things I would handle differently than the current U.S. administration, I appreciate @JDVance taking a leadership role in recognizing this type of regulation is a fundamental unfair trade issue [...]

You may or may not agree, it hardly seems MAGA though.

I suppose you're right. You're still allowed to criticize the government's decisions though! This is certainly true in Italy, which has quite reasonable laws with regards to freedom of speech.

> what is he aiming to achieve here by disrespecting their government

Western government instituitions are hardly sacred. Again, people are allowed to criticize them, or disrespect them event if they so desire. What he's trying to achieve is a more just and reasonable application of the law, as it's quite clear if you'll care to carefully read the tweet instead of raging at his supposed disrespect for the Italian government.

In the world of watches, this logic extends far beyond "handmade vs made by robots". Quartz, for example, is better than automatic & mechanical in every single quantitative metric, yet perceived as lower value due to the lack of craftsmanship.

UBs have unlimited blast radius by definition, and you'll need to write correct code in all your unsafe blocks to ensure your application is 100% memory-safe. There's no debate around that. From this perspective, there's no difference between a C application and a Rust one which contains a single, incorrect unsafe block.

The appreciable difference between the two, however, is how much more debuggable and auditable an unsafe block is. There's usually not that many of them, and they're easily greppable. Those (hopefully) very few lines of code in your entire application benefit from a level of attention and scrutiny that teams can hardly afford for entire C codebases.

EDIT: hardy -> hardly (typo)

Needless to say, no one likes this idea because it throws out of the window centuries of game theory. Endgames would be completely different. I'm not convinced it would be a less interesting game, though.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38239528

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

https://blog.kagi.com/unlimited-searches-for-10

Now, I'd argue that Waymo has probably somewhat solved highways already as they're much simpler than city driving, they're just not offering it to the public yet.