A full-on nuclear war will literally make a large portion of our planet uninhabitable for anyone for centuries, and leave the rest severely crippled and contaminated.

Sorry I know we're supposed to be kind and whatnot in these comments but I can't help but explicitly state that your comment is one of the dumbest things I've read on this site in a while. I hope you otherwise have a good day.

FWIW I don't agree with the comment chain's source, I read "regular people" as "civilians" and don't think there was any nasty connotation meant.

It didn't used to be this way.

I think 20-30 years of copyright should be plenty to extract whatever profits you deserve from the fruits of your labor. Anything beyond that is just holding culture hostage for the benefit of a few. It doesn't serve society in any meaningful way.

So if you use Rust, you get these by simply calling [T]::sort(_unstable). Great performance out of the box :)

On my machine (Apple M2), using the benchmarks from the repository on Apple clang 17 and Rust 1.98 nightly:

    Sorting 50 million doubles:
    ipnsort             0.79s
    blqs                0.90s
    driftsort           1.13s   (stable)
    std::sort           1.22s
    std::stable_sort    4.64s   (stable)

    Sorting 50 million (i32, i32) structs:
    ipnsort             0.82s
    blqs                0.89s
    driftsort           1.07s   (stable)
    std::sort           3.09s
    std::stable_sort    3.15s   (stable)

    driftsort           0.29s   (stable)
    ipnsort             0.81s
    std::sort           1.15s
    std::stable_sort    1.63s   (stable)
    blqs                1.89s

However, since a * b = b * a, our input space has a lot of duplicate outputs. So from this alone you can conclude roughly half of the output space must be uncovered by any input pair, simply because there aren't enough input pairs.

If you are insecure because someone has had one of their otherwise completely innocent PRs merged into your repo... you are insecure, period.

I have no idea why you interpret my words that way. I just meant that I didn't want to analyze the cash portion of their offer any further and just wanted to take it at face value.

If you word it like this it's just a hostile proposed change of leadership. Weird way to apply to become CEO of eBay, but sure.

The issue is the non-cash portion of the offer. They claim that the remaining 27.5B is covered by GameStop stock. But that's more than double the market cap of GameStop.

> Our offer is $125.00 per share, comprising 50% cash and 50% GameStop common stock

Even if you magically included all existing GameStop stock in the offer, it still would not comprise 50% of $55.5B.

EDIT: looks like it's not impossible and I misunderstood. It's a proposed change of leadership with a $25B injection of cash to sweeten the deal. GameStop would issue shares which would capture the original eBay value (since GameStop would own eBay after the trade), making that part a wash. At least assuming people owning eBay stock currently would value the combined company at at least the sum of their parts, which is a big if.

https://docs.python.org/3/library/os.html#os.splice

The point of a CS degree is to know the fundamentals of computing, not the latest best practices in programming that abstract the fundamentals.