Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | EnPissant's commentslogin

I've never seen any significant difference in linear vs affine types.

To me it just seems like Rust has Linear types, and the compiler just inserts some code to destroy your values for you if you don't do it yourself.

I guess the only difference is that linear types can _force_ you to manually consume a value (not necessarily via drop)? Is that what you are going for?


Affine types are "may use" and linear types are "must use," yeah. That is, linear types are stronger.

See https://faultlore.com/blah/linear-rust/ for a (now pretty old but still pretty relevant, I think) exploration into what linear types would mean for Rust.


Is this like JDate but for email?

You think 40% of the people in that area have THC in their system?

Of course you don't. So why make this argument?

Are you funded by Big Cannabis™?


Claude Code is just a better CLI:

- Planning mode. Codex is extremely frustrating. You have to constantly tell it not to edit when you talk to it, and even then it will sometimes just start working.

- Better terminal rendering (Codex seems to go for a "clean" look at the cost of clearly distinguished output)

- It prompts you for questions using menus

- Sub-agents don't pollute your context


He was a super hipster who pretended to be an anti-hipster.

This combination allowed him to make people feel like they were getting let in a little secret and were now part of a club that was better than everyone else.


Incredible this comment is 4 hours old and not flagged. Hacker news is dead.


Why would you want such a thing? HDMI 2.1 does HDR 4k @ 120hz without compression. The entire TV ecosystem uses HDMI. If you want to connect a PC to a TV they always have at least 1 HDMI out, and some have a couple.


Because HDMI 2.1 uses a proprietary protocol that's not implemented in any free OS[0]. If you want to use HDMI 2.1 features right now, your only option is to use a non-free OS like Windows or MacOS.

[0]: This came up recently with Valve: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46220488


It's also a piece of shit that will negotiate whatever it wants with your non free OS instead of giving you unmolested RGB...

from a purely technical point of view i do wish HDMI 2.1 was able to gain traction. On a couple of things I own that do actually use it, its an actual noticeable improvement and I feel does a better job than DisplayPort.

Granted, I suspect quite strongly the next wave of consolidation is going to continue the trend of being around USB-C, since the spec should have the bandwidth to handle any video / audio protocols for quite some time. Matter of time until that happens IMO.

It also lets you have a single cord that could theoretically be your power cord and your A/V cord.


From a purely technical standpoint display port is a better standard. HDMI couldn't get their shit together to do anything with USBC and thus all USBC to HDMI converter cables run display port internally.

Display port already allows multiple video streams, ausiostreams ... Why do we need a closed standard to also do this?!?!


Not really. That same link talks about how Intel and nvidia drivers can provide HDMI 2.1 on Linux but it is via their non-free firmware blob.

AMD doesn't (can't? won't?) do the same but there is a workaround: a DisplayPort to HDMI adapter using a particular chip running hacked firmware. That'll get you 4K 120 Hz with working FreeSync VRR.

https://forum.level1techs.com/t/it-is-possible-to-4k-120-hdr...


Some of us would like our expensive hardware to work without hacked third party dongles.

All of us would like our expensive hardware to work without hacked third party dongles. But given that this isn't possible with AMD open source drivers at the present time, this is the best we'll get for now.

I don't remember where,but somebody explained that the adapters also have some kind of limitation. I can't remember what but they went into deep details and the whole thing is revolting. Governments should protect open source.

Oh, I know this one. It was recently on the HN front page. Open source software stacks are locked out of high end pixel clocks.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46220488


Then why doesn't some other established brand open in the same area and undercut them?


Yep! It's green jelly beans cause acne almost exactly.


He dumped his wife and abandoned his child to be with this woman 18 years younger than him, and he used drugs his entire adult life, long before he met her. No, I would not describe her as a predator.


What's the source on the claim that he used drugs his entire adult life? I thought he had been sober from heroin for decades and only drank alcohol. Additionally, I'm not sure doing drugs alone qualifies one as a bad person.


In the book I read about it, people interviewed claimed she would use in front of him and supply him, intentionally sabotaging his sobriety because it kept him more easily manipulated.


Oh, he chose to dump his wife and get into a relationship with a drug addict?


You can't always see a person's dark side before you have spent many months with them.


Do you know for sure he knew she was a drug addict?


As per the comment about the book above, "she would use in front of him".

In any case, using drugs is something people do. Whether famous or not. Famous people, in fast paced professions, dealing with fame, use them 10x more.

People also cheat or end relationships and go with another person, often younger. Not even in small numbers, even above 50% of marriages end like that. Passion fades, another person might reignite the joy of love.

It is what is is. Nothing especially bad as far as things people do is concerned, except if one thinks like some kind of prude.


The parent comment described her as a drug addict?


I was replying to this in the parent comment:

> supplying him with drugs

They are blaming this woman for Anthony's drug use and I am just pointing out that he has always been an addict.


She was clearly enabling him and playing him, that’s predatory. A similar thing happened between Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love. The friendship between Heath Ledger and Mary-Kate Olsen was very suspicious too.


Any further misogynist finger pointing?


That's a morbid and sexist thing to say.


'Ditto' ("you-the-sexist") is hardly a counter-argument.


No, it’s sexist to read about men being abused by manipulative women and assume misogyny. It stinks of a bias that favors women so intensely that it treats dead men as simply some kind of social breakage. That’s sad.


From what I understand he wasn’t actively doing hard drugs, but had earlier in his life. Maybe that’s not correct. I’m not sure. But if he was addicted and she or anyone else was further encouraging or indulging his addiction, well, that’s abusive by any definition I hold.

I’m not sure about his personal relationships, and don’t care much besides leaving an internet comment, but why are you so quick to dismiss that he may have experienced being manipulated or taken advantage of?


Because he wasn't a boy. He was an adult man.


I see. Is there a class you take when graduating from boy to man that makes you impervious to manipulation? I must have missed the email telling me when class was being held. All I got was this Ted talk https://youtu.be/v4TVV6_2K2M


Yes, it's called "Being an adult and taking responsibility for your choices 101".

Even the legal system understands this, which is why you get harsher penalties for the same crimes as an adult.


I'm looking at the syllabus for that class, but I'm not seeing the part where you become immune to manipulation. Responsible for your actions is covered in week two, but I'm really not seeing the manipulation armor section of the course. Could you help me please?


Sure, look in the course notes for week three: "being manipulated doesn't absolve you of responsibility either".

"I was manipulated" isn't some magic wand to throw around and absolve an adult of responsibility.

Even less so when the manipulation doesn't involve some elaborate con scheme, but simply the allure of a sexy younger woman, not to mention being blatantly explicit about it, about the fact they just want a casual relationship with you, and even ask you to stop being obsessed with them.


Isn't she an adult woman? I don't understand your line of reasoning here. Because someone is a man they can't be manipulated or taken advantage of? Is that what you're suggesting?


Why does she have responsibility and he does not?


Nobody is saying that


Several people are saying that.


Most marriages in the US end in divorce, it’s basically par for the course.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: