If you're writing the code then you can do whatever you want with it. But if I'm writing the code you're using, I want the power to express "the end user cannot use this private field".

You trying to access the private fields in the library I or someone else wrote would be like trying to change a book someone wrote or a painting someone made. It's not the computer restricting you, it's the author of the code.

EDIT: This response was not my finest take.

The complications have nothing to do with Rust but with how computers manage and allocate memory. You might as well also skip C, C++, Zig, and every other language which gives you fine-tuned access to the stack and heap, because you'll run into the same concept.

Having imagination has nothing to do with staying on track and sticking to the conversation topic. Nothing you said has anything to do with criminalizing law abiding citizen for just existing. Privacy rights are a related but separate topic. We could talk about that separately if you want to. But I don't see how AI knowing where we are, or how AI enabling the monetization of our data has anything to do with criminalizing anything I do on a daily basis.

Except, nobody is calling the regular fare paying people criminals. Just the people who aren't paying the fare and breaking the rules.

The real reason you can't "espouse the virtues of freedom of speech in China" is because they will arrest you. Let's not mince words here. The Chinese government would shoot their citizens before they would let them protest or speak their mind freely.

Plus, freedom of speech is about protecting American Citizens from being censored by American Government. Banning an ungovernable, foreign owned business does not stop you from freely expressing yourself on the internet.

Your education was not a lie, but you should still get a refund on your failed education. You clearly did not learn to think critically.

I would expect AI to at least generate answers consistent with reality. If I ask for a historical figure who just happens to be white, AI needs to return a picture of that white person. Any other race is simply wrong. If I ask a question about racial based statistics which have an objective answer, AI needs to return that objective answer.

If we can't even trust AI to give us factual answers to simple objective facts, then there's definitely no reason to trust whatever AI says about complicated, subjective topics.

If I were editing this article, I would tell the author to remove the entire paragraph leading up to this snippet. Why would you insert a section that's so bs that even you immediately criticize your own point?

Truthfully, I read this article and came away with the conclusion that writing code is nothing at all like writing prose.

Evidence shows that having an excess of resources actually leads to more financial irresponsibly, not less. Or as the Illustrious Notorious B.I.G. eloquently put it: "mo money, mo problems":

"The CFP Board of Standards says nearly one-third of lottery winners eventually declare bankruptcy, and lottery winners are more likely to declare bankruptcy within three to five years than the average American."

https://www.ngpf.org/blog/question-of-the-day/question-of-th....

There are many examples of lottery winners, athletes, and celebrities who came across considerable resources yet still went broke because they didn't understand how to manage it or the concept of exponential growth.

A fool and his money are easily parted, as the saying goes. People who don't have financial literacy will lose their money over and over again regardless of how much you give them.

Exponential growth is a fundamental concept of financial literacy. If you want to invest in the stock market or plan your 401k it helps to understand exponential growth. The reason why it's impossible to get rich off a wage is because of the difference between exponential vs linear growth.

>I don't spend money I don't have.

You've never taken out a mortgage or opened a margin account? Plenty of responsible people make money by spending money they don't have every day.

To use a credit card responsibly you need to understand the concept of exponential growth, or you might accidentally turn a manageable $500 debt into a burdensome $5000 debt. Same goes for understanding good debt (mortgages) vs bad debt.

It might not be solving a polynomial per se, but I don't see how you get to understanding exponential equations without at least understanding algebra.

My dad didn't graduate high school and even he knew enough algebra to work out how much money he needed a month for cigarettes (until he eventually quit once he really thought about the numbers).

To sum up the whole CMF in my words, it's Critical Theory applied without critical thinking used. Proponents saw that minorities were struggling in math class, so they proposed a solution to handicap math classes. That's literally what CMF is. Proponents would rather see everyone fail than some people succeed. Especially if those some successful people are not minorities.

Why we should learn math from people who clearly have no respect for facts and reality in the first place is beyond me. Bertrand Russell, one of the founders of set theory, would have outright rejected most of the philosophy that inspired the CMF.

Enforcing behavior via the typing system prevents bad code from even compiling and running in the first place.

When you stop thinking of Optional as a inconvenient wrapper clumsily wrapping a T and starting thinking of it as a first class datatype with its own members and methods, then it becomes a lot more clear to reason about the logic.