Germany does that too.

Especially minced meat always is “use by” and you really should respect that. Someone I know went to the hospital for that.

Work with medical data in Germany and you’ll burn CDs every day, probably for the next 50 years.

The hero we need

Hmmm. Maybe I should try that then. Never actually understood why people like these managers as I was always satisfied with the directory tree for organization.

Well maybe besides music. There beets fucking rocks. But in the end I use it also only to sort music into a directory structure.

What’s wrong with just folders and file names?

Another one of those tools is image magic. Like ffmpeg but for images

My experience in Finland says: yes, they know happiness

Can you get apocalypse insurance? I think I’m in the market for it.

No, no, no. It’s the end of times. I can hear the trumpets of the apocalypse.

Now Valve needs to release half life 3 and the world as we know it will truly perish.

Jokes aside. I hope this means work on a UI overhaul can seriously begin.

The only way to make Rust segfault is by performing unsafe operations.

Challange accepted. The following Rust code technically segfaults:

fn stackover(a : i64) -> i64 {
    return stackover(a);
}


fn main() {
    println!("{}", stackover(100));
}

A stack overflow is technically a segmentation violation. At least on linux the program recives the SIGSEGV signal. This compiles and I am no rust dev but this does not use unsafe code, right?

While the compiler shows a warning, the error message the program prints when run is not very helpfull IMHO:

thread 'main' has overflowed its stack
fatal runtime error: stack overflow
[1]    45211 IOT instruction (core dumped)  ../target/debug/rust

Edit: Even the compiler warning can be tricked by making it do recusion in pairs:

fn stackover_a(a : i64) -> i64 {
    return stackover_b(a);
}

fn stackover_b(a : i64) -> i64 {
    return stackover_a(a);
}

fn main() {
    println!("{}", stackover_a(100));
}

Can humans think under that definition? I think it’s highly likely we can’t.

Are humans always able to come up with anything new? If so where does this ability originate. How would someone identify that?

I think this definition of thought is too limited and not how we use the word intuitively.

Nope. Almost every day I learn something new.

In assessing risk assume everyone is a bumbling idiot. For we all have moments of great stupidity.

There is definitely a risk in changing it. Many automation systems that assume there is a master branch needed to be changed. Something that’s trivial yes but changing a perfectly running system is always a potential risk.

Also stuff like tutorials and documentation become outdated.

Games (until recently?) were not considered as art by the courts in Germany.

I’ll bite: What is democracy to you?

If you don’t find resource planning on an enterprise level erotic then I don’t know what’s wrong with me

Yea Microsoft doesn’t do interstates well I’ve heard

If it’s entertaining and well presented I could and have watched videos like this that are multiple hours long.

Also why do you think this is crap?

I didn’t know I needed to be Dutch to use the Dutch angle perspective in my photos.

Or a cowboy to use the cowboy shot.

Using a method named after a place or something does not mean being from that place etc