Yes, Android uses a Linux kernel, but it's a worked example of why "GNU/Linux" actually does mean something. Linux is just a kernel; it gives you drivers and basic OS support, but it's just one part. Android/Linux (Android on a Linux kernel) is its own complete userland, with its own libc (bionic), own coreutils, some sort of drivers running in userspace, its own graphics stack (not X11 or Wayland based), etc. On the other hand, GNU/Linux (GNU-flavored system built on a Linux kernel) uses GNU's glibc, GNU coreutils, typically upstreamed drivers (or if not, at least reusable packaged out-of-tree drivers), Xorg or some Wayland compositor providing GUI, and usually some sort of package manager that owns the entire system (user apps, libraries, core OS). They're really different beasts.
Technically, but have you ever worked at a shell on an Android device? It feels alien, and all the interesting stuff is wrapped up in the JVM so the fact that it's wrapped in Linux doesn't gain you much.
You should give Termux a try. It's an honest to goodness "Linux environment" with a full package manager for many many popular tools and utilities, including the build essentials if you want to compile software directly on your device.
Android tends to use patched kernels, but the diffs are getting smaller (Google made it an explicit goal to bring their fork back to mainline). The bigger issue is the weird userland; a Linux kernel is one thing, but bionic is not a libc meant to run anything but Android, and toybox is no GNU coreutils.
yeah, it's not like this is a randomized experiment so there might be confounding factors. Observational studies aren't very useful for determining causation in general
true, but the written language is exactly the same.
taiwan has national health care, really good public transportation system, really liberal government (gay marriage recently) despite the low gdp. I would move there if they legalized weed which is sadly unlikely
now that hong kong is a part of the PRC, maybe they'll be forced to use the national language (mandarin) lol
Cantonese and Mandarin are mutually unintelligible. China likes to call them different dialects for political reasons, but for all practical purposes they are different languages.
If you're talking about spoken, probably the difference is something more like English v German.
Individual words can look similar but combine them into a sentence and you probably wouldn't be able to parse it on a first take (if they were transcribed into romanized letters), and there are some grammar differences.
It's even worse than English v German imo (speaking both, and descendant from Cantonese, married to a mainlander)
The german grammar is a fair point though. Makes every sentence sound like churchill trying to be annoying on purpose.
It's like English v German, but imagine that German had a bunch of sounds that seem identical to you but are actually different sounds (you just can't hear the difference). Imagine that German Wasser (water) and Wäscher (washer, ish) sounded exactly the same to you, and you couldn't tell the difference. Now imagine that literally every single word had dozens of those identically-sounding-but-actually-different-sounding-to-native-speakers examples.
The issue imo is the increase in tones. Mandarin has 4-5 tones, cantonese has like 6-9. And the tones in Mandarin are much easier to distinguish.
Yet Taiwan is also under threat from PRC. Also emigrating (ie leaving born place, family, friends, etc) is not that easy even when money/job is not an issue.
It's a much different threat, however. As I've covered in other threads, CCP action against Taiwan will result in an actual war which may or may not involve the U.S. and to an unknown degree.
True, this can be awful if your org operates globally. This isn't a big deal in orgs that deal with a single region. However, I will say the worse part is that when things go wrong, you are first to get a call which can be very stressful. I still get anxiety when someone uses the :rotating-light: emoji.
I'm assuming SSBM is Super Smash Brothers Melee (had to look it up)? Never played it or any variety of Super Smash Brothers for that matter. As such, I'm not entirely sure I'm qualified to give an opinion ... but that never stopped anyone on HN.
Assuming you mean "wavedashing" (the only vaguely relevant thing I could find), and given that https://www.ssbwiki.com/Wavedash claims it was explicitly left in as a mechanic during development, no, I'd not consider that a "cheat".
If the developer’s opinion is actually what matters most to you, then you may find it interesting that the developers of Animal Crossing seem to have a rather tepid view on time traveling. Many have interpreted them as having said time traveling is not cheating, although I am not sure exactly what that is concluded from; still, it does seem as though they acknowledge it as valid, if still unintended, a way to play the game:
>“Adding all the seasonal events by updates wasn’t our way to shun away time travel by any means,” Kyogoku said. “But Animal Crossing is a game that users are able to play and enjoy throughout the year.”
Of course though, this worldview is pretty hard to really get behind because it’s even more arbitrary than usual. Some of the developers may dislike time travel and others might endorse it.
Moreover, opinions of the developers may even shift. On the topic of Wavedashing, Sakurai expresses discontent for it:
> While Sakurai noted that wavedashing was widespread in an interview with Nintendo Power, he disliked the technique, as he felt it had led to a significant degree of separation between beginning and advanced players.
All in all, even trying to be very generous and non-presumptive, I am having trouble seeing the argument as having a rational basis. It seems like one born and mostly justified only from emotional response.
> the developers of Animal Crossing seem to have a rather tepid view on time traveling
That may be but it's not a mechanic that's specifically in the game itself, is it? Which means you can't (honestly) equate it to wave dashing to make a point.
> I am having trouble seeing the argument as having a rational basis.
Which argument? The one that time travel in Animal Crossing is "cheating"? In that case, go nuts, time travel all you want! But at least allow others their opinion on the topic.
The most interesting thing I've seen as far as this is concerned is Taint Analysis. You can label functions as returning user input, some functions take user input and turn it into sanitized input, and there are functions that should never take non-sanitized input.
FWIW the first practical application of input tainting that comes to mind is Perl's circa 2001, although I wouldn't be surprised to hear Smalltalk went there before.
I'm not familar with pyre, but i have experimented with some security static analysis tools. The one's i have experimented with take some normal program and try to analyse it. The analysis is usually far from complete, and as a result has so many false positives that its difficult to adopt.
Anyways, i would say those are rather different from systems where you give an actual proof of correctness.
