The church has been using logic in the study of religion for thousands of years. This is no different. One way or another asking questions and thinking about problems is OK.
Keep in mind C is just basically assembly but encapsulated in a pretty package. If you create small executables and dump out the generated unoptimized assembly you'll be surprised just how simple it is. It pretty much just encapsulates the ideas of System V binary compatibility and then keeps going. So developing a language from scratch and skipping the use of C would really likely be just causing yourself more pain than you need as you're going to have to replicate all of the things C does anyways, so why not reuse what the experts have already done. And you get a lot of cross CPU and cross compiler portability.
What you want is the idea of bootstrapping. Write your compiler in C, then as your language specification is developed enough, dogfood your own compiler. Write your compiler in your new language, then compile itself. This is called bootstrapping and is how many languages are developed. Once you are fully bootstrapped you can drop C altogether.
For portability by far the vast majority will say C. In my experience the C compiler optimizer will do a lot with -O2 or -03 but it can't always infer correct SIMD optimization for some operations and on occasion you have to drop down into x86_64 assembly. The idea is do most things in C and use __asm__ to write custom assembly instructions. With #defines around the assembly for each processor you plan on supporting you get the benefit of both C optimizers and portability across different CPUs as well as any future updates to the compiler in the future. But the compiler writers will say to use intrinsics and extended assembly rather than raw assembly because when you write raw assembly your code becomes a black box to the compiler and it can't infer optimizations for your surrounding code that interfaces with the assembly. I think C with extended Asm is likely the most sane combination if you don't mind the slightly ugly syntax and the fact that there could be differences between compilers. That being said, C with compiler intrinsics seems to be a happy compromise for those that don't want to shift around registers and deal with the stack.
I don't use Rust so I can't comment on it but it also has compiler intrinsics + a memory safety model. It's compiler is really dog slow last time I used it so I hope that has improved but nobody is really killing C any time soon, even if there's enthusiasm for memory safety. Sooner or later you have to delve down into the depths of Narnia and you may as well get comfortable dealing with memory.
My likely favorite combination is Python + C (for the speed stuff) + Intrinsics (for the really speed stuff).
This is an apt observation. Anything negative. Even if true. Even if it doesn't reflect on you. They want someone socially aware enough that they can say negative things without saying anything negative. There's a nuance. "I understand where they're coming from. There's definitely situations where that is preferred", translates to "I disagree totally but it's their prerogative so I'm not going to worry myself too much with that decision."
It shows experience with people and ability to read between the lines.
Correct. This is all based on my previous knowledge of my local monopoly agreements that someone told me about years ago. They refused for months to install internet until I asked people in my vicinity if anyone had asked for a phone line. Nobody had. So I did and instead of copper they ran fiber within 2 weeks.
I can only infer what happened but they really didn't want me to be without a regular phone line so I determined that was their legal weakness. The only way companies that large move like that is if something threatens their status with the local government. A call from a resident saying the company wouldn't install a phone line is a big no-no in my understanding.
In a bunch of areas the companies rely on legal monopolies that were given to them by the local governments. The agreement was they get a monopoly if they agree to install phone lines for everyone who asks. If they don't run copper then the next thing they'll do is run whatever is their preferred equivalent. It's a quasi government+private monopoly agreement that benefits both and ensures residents get phone lines.
No guarantees bc it entirely relies on your local ordinances, but it did work for me when the company was giving me the runaround about internet. I just asked for a landline phone and they had fiber installed within 2 weeks.
Ask them for a landline phone. They'll either have to run new copper or choose to install fiber. Once they run copper then get a DSL company to run through that. Generally they won't want to run copper and don't want competition so they'll go ahead and run fiber. In either case I believe the law they're constrained by is local ordinances giving them a region based monopoly for traditional landline access in exchange for ensuring everyone has a phone. If you force the issue they'll run SOMETHING to your door. And through that something you'll have more options.
Just got done watching all of the seasons again (for the third time). I keep forgetting how incredibly sad the last few episodes are. It's a gut punch every time especially knowing the reality of how many of the actors have passed on since. One of the only shows that properly ends and gives a sense of closure. Almost too good.
One of my favorite shows of all time. Excited to watch anything that's even remotely related to this.
The EV push is marketing. It's someone trying to sell something. If countries were interested in solving anything they'd just install more electric trains. Even less of a commitment would be just use diesel commuter trains until the electric comes online. Until this happens everything else is just someone trying to sell stuff.
I had it give me book recommendations on a particular topic. It straight up made up a fake book with a fake author and attributed it to a publisher. It did this with confidence. I even emailed the publisher to see if they had ever carried that book. Never heard of it.
The problem seems to be whether or not the content was generated via language modeling or via direct references. When it crosses into language modeling it is just making stuff up on the fly. This sometimes works for programming, but for specific things that connect to the real world it can be phenomenally wrong.
They did an experiment like this called the Quantum Eraser Experiment. The outcome is quite strange and I still don't know if I fully understand the result. It suggests potential retro-causality or at least superdeterminism or some kinds of weird time independent action. People will claim I'm just misinterpreting the experiment but I've yet to hear any explanation that doesn't hand wave some critical things away.