Objecting to murder is still politics, no? In fact, US republicans and democrats can't seem to agree who is fine to murder.
Republicans say that abortions are murder, but often also that prisoner executions are fine. Democrats tend to be in favor of abortions, but not of the death penalty.
I'm not making a moral judgement here, but I do want to ask. Is it just politics you don't agree with that you don't want Andrew to express?
Objecting to murder qua murder isn't political, since murder is defined as unjustified premeditated killing. The key word being _unjustified_: it's hardly political to oppose something that is unjustified by definition. The political aspect comes into play when people start to debate which killings are and aren't justified.
Your abortion example is a good one, so I will use it to clarify my point. When people say “abortion is murder!” they aren't just objecting to murder. They are asserting that abortion _is_ murder, actually: it's the political view that killing unborn foetuses is unjustified. The essential claim isn't “murder is bad”, but rather “abortion is bad”. So summarizing opposition to abortion as simply opposition to murder isn't accurate at all. It doesn't cut at the core of the objection.
The same situation exists with ICE. Modern societies grant the state a monopoly on violence, which the state delegates to officers who enforce the law of the land. When those officers use violence, it can be justified by virtue of them enforcing the monopoly on violence on behalf of the state, for the greater good. When a police officer shoots a gunman who attempts to kill civilians, few people would call that murder: after all, the killing is justified. Sometimes, law enforcement officers kill people when it's questionable whether it is justified. Labeling the killing as “murder” or “not murder” is then a political position: you aren't making a specific statement about murder (again, almost everyone agrees that murder is bad), but you're insisting that killing a person in such-or-such a situation is (not) justified.
So yes, insisting that the recent ICE killings of left wing activists constitute murder is a political statement: it's asserting that this ostensibly justified use of state violence was not justified in this case. Which is a point you can plausibly make, but you cannot insist it's not political, because determining which types of killings are justified and which are not is intrinsically a matter of publicy policy, i.e., political.
> Is it just politics you don't agree with that you don't want Andrew to express?
Ideally, I would not want Andrew to express any political views, at least not in his capacity of Zig project leader. I prefer open source projects that are maximally inclusive, which means not enforcing contributors to conform with particular political views.
Of course there is no law that says open source projects must be inclusive of political views, so you can create an open source project just for people who have the same political views as you do, but then I think the decent thing to do is at least be honest about it.
If Andrew thinks Zig is an American Democratic software project, he should clearly label it as such on ziglang.org. And then I also think Hacker News should ban him when he makes posts where he takes political stances, since Hacker News explicitly has a policy that opposes politics. If Andrew doesn't think Zig is just for American Democrats, he should refrain from making political posts on the Zig language blog. He can still go to his anti-ICE rally and post about it on his personal Bluesky account or whatever, but that at least makes it clear those are his personal political views, and they are not part of the Zig project.
Of course, I cannot enforce either of those things. They are just my personal preferences.
Using system/distro packages is great when you're writing server software and need your base system to be stable.
But, for software distributed to users, this model fails hard. You generally need to ship across OSs, OS versions and for that you need consistent library versions. Your software being broken because a distro maintainer has decided that a 3 year old version of your dependency is close enough is terrible.
If you software is not being distributed by that distribution and is using some external download tool, it is inherently not supported and the only way to make sure it works is to compile from source.
If you compile from source, but your distro is shipping library version that is incompatible with the app, you're still screwed.
This is why flatpaks/snaps/app images have been taking off. Devs don't have time for bugs caused by incompatible libraries. Distro packagers don't have time to properly test the thousands of packages they have to change to satisfy their 1 shared library version policy.
According to the twitter analytics you can see on the post (at least on nitter), the original
> We built a browser with GPT-5.2 in Cursor. It ran uninterrupted for one week.
tweet was seen by over 6 million people.
The follow up tweet which includes the link to the actual details was seen by less than 200000.
That's just how Twitter engagement works and these companies know it. Over 6 million people were fed bullshit. I'm sorry, but it's actually a great example of CEOs over hyping their products.
You only quoted the first line. The full tweet includes the crucial "it kind of works" line - that's not in the follow-up tweet, it's in the original.
Here's that first tweet in full:
> We built a browser with GPT-5.2 in Cursor. It ran uninterrupted for one week.
> It's 3M+ lines of code across thousands of files. The rendering engine is from-scratch in Rust with HTML parsing, CSS cascade, layout, text shaping, paint, and a custom JS VM.
> It kind of works! It still has issues and is of course very far from Webkit/Chromium parity, but we were astonished that simple websites render quickly and largely correctly.
The second tweet, with only 225,000 views, was just the following text and a link to the GitHub repository:
> Excited to continue stress testing the boundaries of coding agents and report back on what we learn.
There's this reply in the comments from the author.
> Nah, it’s a problem with this particular mouse in X and Wayland and it’s been seen on Fedora and OpenSuse almost since the mouse came out. Not a Cachy issue, a nonstandard USB HID implementation by the vendor
Tbh, I don't even know what a distro would have to do to break this.
It's kind of funny, but I had the exact opposite experience. I couldn't get VSCode to reliably format Typescript/React code across several projects. Some would work and others would not. Sometimes it would format, but with wrong settings.
Frustrated, I switched to Zed and have not had that issue since.
Considering how many people will defend C++ compilers bending over backwards to exploit some accidental undefined behaviour with "but it's fast though" then yeah, that's not an inaccurate assessment.
I think there's certainly some blame that falls on the engineers at Facebook. But, in my experience, if you put any number of developers in a room, noone is going to come up with "let's help scam the elderly". That requires an MBA or two.
Nah, engineers like to solve problems. The silicon valley jerk ratio scene doesn't come out of nowhere. You can get engineers to work on solving just about any problem if you make it interesting enough to them.
It's not really a tax though. Other platforms offer a lower percentage (Epic: 0% up to 1000000 copies sold and 12% above) and yet the prices on Epic aren't cheaper than on steam.
If the final price doesn't change based on the storefront cut, then as a consumer, I don't care.
The X Window System (X11) is a protocol with multiple implementations. Sure, the X.Org Server (Xorg) was the most popular by a huge margin, but there were quite a few others (e.g. XFree86, Xming, XWayland), though over time most were discontinued for one reason or another.
X11 and Wayland do differ in an important way: in X11 window managers (GNOME, KDE, i3, whatever) all sat atop the Xorg server; whereas in Wayland there’s only the compositor, so GNOME, KDE, Sway, whatever, all essentially include their own equivalent of Xorg (which could be fully integrated, or factored into a library, such as Mutter, KWin, wlroots).
There were plenty of those, including commercial ones.
It's pretty hard to find but ~25 years ago I was using Xi Graphics Accelerated-X which had 3D acceleration long before Xfree86.
Update: but yes I imagine it had some code from original MIT release.
For completely independent one you can have a look at WeirdX/WiredX, which was written in Java and even supported antialiasing and transparency for core protocol (something that Xfree86 people claimed to be impossible to implement).
Republicans say that abortions are murder, but often also that prisoner executions are fine. Democrats tend to be in favor of abortions, but not of the death penalty.
I'm not making a moral judgement here, but I do want to ask. Is it just politics you don't agree with that you don't want Andrew to express?
reply