I don’t know exactly what OP is referring to, but the Basque country in Spain is a region with certain separatist political actors that advocate/push for the independence of the Basque Country.
I didn't say that they were left wing terrorist, but I assumed (perhaps wrongly) that you were referring to their support of left wing political parties.
Again, I assumed that you are a conservative or libertarian. I apologise. I'm sorry that I just assumed you were a right winger.
You're an investor, it says so in your profile. Most of your comments have a fairly standard pro-markets anti-regulation view point. I was extrapolating that to be conservative but you could also be a liberal pro-markets type. So, my bad.
After doing some cursory googling, it looks like you were probably referring to the ETA. I would like to hear more about the terrorism and corruption, if you feel like going into it.
I have to admit, though, as an investor you and I see the world very very differently. If you don't mind me disagreeing with you I will try not to make any more assumptions.
What a weak and low effort post. This is not reddit. If you didn't find anything then that's were you should stop, otherwise you're only trying to entertain your biases and push them onto us.
They are the Spanish strike force! Largely irrelevant around here, until their fragile national unity is bruised and they all jump crying foul. Pretty funny when you see them for what they are.
I'm really interested in the Core guidelines. They are only a few years old, however. It will be super interesting to see some case studies of large codebase adoption in the next few years. The lifetime profile is the one that I 'm most interested in seeing some real studies on. Some of the changes seem pretty simple (of course, I don't have to make them in any codebases) so it makes me wonder if they are expressive enough to solve a large chunk of the use after free problems.
Even if Gdansk is liberally run it sends a signal to legislators that policies effect revenue and gives them a reason to push back that avoids moral arguments. That being said, I think it cedes the moral argument to the opposition, but any fight like this has multiple fronts.
The reasoning is very different from what you wrote. Surely, you see the difference.
The read through of docs in their repo is interesting. They mention Pony several times as an inspiration because of it's type system's concurrency primitives. Rust and Cyclone are also mentioned. I've recently gotten over my dislike for Rust evangelism and started learning it. It's just too good of an idea to let internet BS and my propensity to hold a grudge stop me from learning.
It's interesting that building a self-hosting environment is a stated non-goal. Sounds like they are really focused on research and not building a production toolchain, but who knows?
I'm really interested in seeing where it goes. Not really my area but I'll probably spend a couple of nights playing around with it.
(I work on Verona, originally as an intern at MSR, now as a PhD)
> It's interesting that building a self-hosting environment is a stated non-goal. Sounds like they are really focused on research and not building a production toolchain, but who knows?
The point isn't that the language will never be "production-ready" enough for it. It's that the language is intentionally limited in what kind of low-level hacks and concurrent mutation you can do, in order to remain safe. Writing this kind of code correctly is hard, and designing a language that exposes the full expressiveness in a sound and practical way is near impossible (at least given today's state of the art research).
The Verona runtime is therefore implemented in C++, which does have these capabilities. In some future it would nicer to formally verify the runtime for correctness, but that's a lot of work.
The project is being done by MSR in cooperation with Imperial College (where Pony came from), and one of the Pony author’s works at MSR now, so I’m guessing this is by many of the people who worked on Pony.
The study of economics is conducted by a large number of people (many thousands), with (apparently, at least) diverse views. I am interested in your answers to these questions:
1. Do you believe that all economists are engaged in distributing propaganda, or just some?
2. To what end is the propaganda distributed (or maybe on whose behalf)?
3. Are other academic fields similarly concerned with distributing propaganda?
So, I'm not saying that all academia is a front for aliens.
I'm saying that the narrative produced from the status quo in economics has been, for almost all of my life, very conducive to the interests of the powerful.
Do other fields have people doing that? Of course. The petroleum industry has been able to pay for people to push their agenda. That's a thing that happens.
There are some historical, political, and material reasons for the state of economics and academia in general.
Lots of academia is literally just job training for corporations, so don't front like it's above the fray. Even genuine, and valuable, research gets prioritized over less research that isn't as valuable in the private sector. So, again, I'm not the one saying that academia has a problem. Lot's of academics have said these things.
Also, from an argumentative perspective it always seems like economics starts from something like a thought experiment and then go on to use the results of that "experiment" as a evidence in its own right.
Yes, Einstein used thought experiments, but he used known physics as the starting point. I hear economic arguments that start with a premise that isn't a settled thing like "lets assume that we are hunter gatherers on the savanna and you have some beads and I have an arrowhead." It's not based on a measurement that other people have made and agree on. It's not even based on an archaeological dig where the bones of two people were found.
I realize that isn't what actually goes into a phd thesis. Its economics used as a force of nature that bothers me. It's inevitable. Maybe I'm just calling economics the pseudo-ish stuff that I get presented as a layman. Maybe every economics school in every university has a healthy group of people who are critical of basic assumptions. I hope so.
If you are an economist and I offended you, then please accept my apology. That wasn't my intention, really.
I'm not an economist, but my understanding is that some, or even a lot, of contemporary graduate-level economics is indeed like you describe, but also that there is a lot that isn't, and that the field itself is very diverse. It seemed like you were writing off everyone because of the sins of the currently dominant strand, which felt unfair.
PG mentions in footnote 2 that " the far right tend to ignore moderates rather than despise them as backsliders. I'm not sure why. Perhaps it means that the far right is less ideological than the far left. Or perhaps that they are more confident, or more resigned, or simply more disorganized"
This is not the case. The far-right police doctrinal purity very well, actually. They have built multiple pipelines for taking ideas that were once extreme and moving them to the moderates, who they then push to adopt these ideas lest the be called out as "Republican in name only (RINO)" or whatever the du jour insults are.
I don't know about the current state of things, but the far right used bank robberies to finance operations across multiple fronts back in the 90's. They used the proceeds to fund groups in different regions.
The far right is dangerous in a way that "the left" hasn't been since the 1960's.
I think its telling that PG's really concerned with ideologies that are a threat to his financial/class interests, thereby validating a point maid be leftist critiques of wealthy people like PG. So, way to prove their point, PG-man.
The history of the far right is really interesting and I would recommend it as a field of reading for anyone interested in American history.
"If that saying doesn’t convince you of the fatuousness of left vs. right labels"
It reminds me of how fatuous Nassim Taleb can be, certainly. That quote basically deletes any historical context and actual belief held by those groups. It reduces the actual differences that they have to a bumper sticker level of depth.
Not trying to be insulting or anything, I just don't find it that helpful, and I'm also not particularly a fan of Taleb.
There was a copy of the code for Singularity, the predecessor to Midori, on CodePlex. Not sure if it ever got moved to Github.
It has to be said, though. It's more like "source available", not open source. I can't remember what the license is specifically, but it's not a proper open source license.
You could see it, build it, and play with it, but you couldn't do anything else with it. No sharing changes, no derivatives, etc.
Singularity would be a neat place to start working on a managed code OS, though.
I would prefer that they properly open source Midori.
