Safer in terms of the risk of death, sure, but there seem to be other risks involved.[0] That paper doesn't necessarily disagree with anything in the page you linked, and it's pretty old now. I just want to emphasise that it's not a simple decision to make.
I bought a domain name from a domain squatter who used Epik and there's a 60 day waiting period before I'm allowed to transfer the domain away.
Their site is one of the buggiest I've ever used (no, really), so this hack doesn't surprise me at all. Now I'm trying to remember how much personal information I would have given them.
I wonder how difficult it would be to make something similar that generated 3D models. Most of the examples look like they'd make good video game levels.
I don't quite get it either, but one of their documentation files seems to imply that they can:
>In countries where copyright protection is available (which does not include the U.S.), contributions made by U.S. Federal Government employees are released under the License. Merged contributions from private contributors are released under the License.
At his level at the time, sure. Anyone can write a web quiz. But I would think that a lot of the most significant ethical challenges developers face would be in much more specialized areas.
Safety-critical systems often have real-time and embedded components, for example. The regulations for safety-critical software vary a lot between industries, too, which makes it even harder to find a replacement for someone who leaves for ethical reasons.
Often a lot closer than in other languages, but that's still not close at all. And it depends a lot on how careful your code is. If you want to rely on the type system more heavily, you have to do more work upfront. E.g., using a simple SQL library that just takes queries as strings vs building your queries in a type-safe EDSL. You can write sketchy Haskell just like any other language, but you're likely to be much more aware of it.
>And how close are we to having that kind of capability for real-time programming?
Last time I looked it seemed like real-time Haskell still had a fair way to go. Presumably because it has garbage collection, lazy evaluation by default and other things that make it hard to prove time bounds. It can also be really hard to optimize sometimes IMO. But I doubt the features that make Haskell reliable are dependent on the features that don't suit real-time programs. I don't know of any pure functional languages with similar type systems, though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programming_languages_... has a pretty small list.
>I frequently see remarks like 'Simon Peyton-Jones, great talk about Haskell but why did he use Comic Sans?' but nobody's ever been able to tell me what is wrong with it. It's a nice legible font, I like it. So until somebody explains to me ...
Of all the little things that annoy me about Comic Sans, this is by far the worst.
Suppose I showed some of my Haskell code to a group of people and they all told me that every Haskell expert says I should keep my IO functions as minimal and separate as I can. I ask them why, and they assure me again that Simon Peyton-Jones himself is adamant about this, but none of them seem to be able to put an explanation into words.
I wouldn't just dismiss them with "it works fine for me" and not even bother to Google something like "haskell separate impure code". So why do so many people do that when the advice is coming from designers instead of engineers?