• 0 Posts
  • 3 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
Cake day: May 19th, 2024
  • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldtoLinux@lemmy.ml•One Of The Rust Linux Kernel Maintainers Steps Down - Cites "Nontechnical Nonsense"English
    52·
    3 months ago

    At the cost of sounding naive and stupid

    It may be a naive question, but it’s a very important naive question. Naive doesn’t mean bad.

    The answer is that that is not possible, because the compiler is supposed to translate the very specific language of C into mostly very specific machine instructions. The programmers who wrote the code, did so because they usually expect a very specific behavior. So, that would be broken.

    But also, the “unsafety” is in the behavior of the system and built into the language and the compiler.

    It’s a bit of a flawed comparison, but you can’t build a house on a foundation of wooden poles, because of the advantages that wood offers, and then complain that they are flammable. You can build it in steel, but you have to replace all of the poles. Just the poles on the left side won’t do.

    And you can’t automatically detect the unsafe parts and just patch those either. If we could, we could just fix them directly or we could automatically transpile them. Darpa is trying that at the moment.

  • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldtoGames@lemmy.world•Louis Rossmann's response to harsh criticism of "Stop Killing Games" from Thor of @PirateSoftwareEnglish
    42·
    4 months ago

    How is it vague?

    It’s vague in all the legal ways:

    • First of all which kinds of games it applies to. It obviously can’t work for games that have a technical server requirement, … world of warcraft, but actually EVE online. The guys who run that game, get experimental hardware that’s usually military only (or at least they did in the past). The server is not something, you could run even if you wanted to. Drawing the legal boundary between what “could be” single player offline (e.g. the crew, far cry, hitman), wasn’t done.

    • It’s not clear how it should apply to in terms of company scale. The new messenger legislation that was passed, made space for the EU parliament / system to declare and name, individually, who counts as a company that is is big enough, so that they have to open their messenger system to others for interoperability. It’s not clear if the law has to apply to everyone, and every game, or just e.g. companies above 20 million revenue or something.

    • It’s not clear what happens if a company goes bankrupt, and the system isn’t immediately ready to keep working.

    And a few more.

    That being said, I think Thor’s stance on this is silly. All of that is part of the discussion that is now starting. He could raise good points and get them included, but I guess that’s not happening.