I agree that the work culture promoting this is bad, but being sick is still simply not an excuse to fabricate quotes with AI. It's still just journalistic malfeasance, and if Ars actually cares about the quality of their journalism, he should be fired for it.

Dating apps would go out of business if they did their job, because success means leaving the platform. They make more money if they hold out a carrot and make it difficult to succeed.

This is also true of those services that "delete" your data from data brokers. Their entire business model relies on them failing to do their job.

Only three years ago, too. That kinda surprised me.

Even considering that one can personally control their own chat service is already a pretty big leap in technical knowledge. Many, many average users don't even know that's an option, nevermind how it's even done.

Every single website on the internet just says "whoopsie doodle, me made an oopsie" instead of just telling me what the problem is. This so-called mistake is so widespread that it has been the standard for at least a decade.

I agree it's a mistake, but I don't believe that it's viewed that way by anyone making the decision to do it.

You dont expose error details to the user for security reasons, even though it does indeed make the user experience worse.

I understand not exposing a full stack trace, but I don't see any excuse to not even expose a googleable error code. If me having an error code makes your product insecure, then you have a much bigger problem.

I show the stack trace on AGPL projects. Why hide what they can already see for themselves?

The reason I see is that it might expose the value of secret keys or other sensitive variables. But if you are certain it won't happen, then yes

It's stated under the "Sandboxes?" heading.

> Deno Sandbox gives you lightweight Linux microVMs (running in the Deno Deploy cloud) ...

Perceptual hashes are a type of locality sensitive hash.

All of those are optional restrictions, not mandatory. On Windows, it's (practically) mandatory.

Maybe some Windows wizards could get around the mandatory restrictions, but an average Linux user can get around the optional ones.

Streaming as defacto metaphor for file access goes back to tape drives. Random Access patterns make more sense with today’s media yet we’re all still fscanf-ing

Of course there are alternatives but the resource-as-stream metaphor is so ubiquitous in Unix, it’s hard to avoid.

Drive letters are just /mnt, you can get around that, even with GUI.

So why a default Windows install still uses and shows C:?

Because A is reserved for floppy drive, and B - for zip drive.

A: and B: were both for floppies, dual floppy systems were around and common, both with and without hard disks, long before Zip disks existed, and Zip disks came around far too late (1994!) to influence the MS-DOS naming standard.

No, A: and B: were for floppies, when having 2 floppy readers was the norm.

But anyway ignoring the sarcasm my question was implying: if this is totally customizable in Windows, why Microsoft still ships C: (or whatever other letter) as the default name for the first user partition? Show it to legacy programs with hardcoded values to maintain compatibility, but at least in Explorer and MS controlled software, use some more modern/legible name.

Drive B was always a floppy disk drive.

Zip disks presented themselves with drive letters higher than B (usually D: assuming you had a single hard disk). However, some (all?) Zip drives could also accept legacy 3.5" floppies, and those would show up as B.

You're confused and you're thinking of the LS-120 SuperDisk. On some machines, it could be setup to appear as A: or B: when a 3.5" floppy was inserted.

Zip drives were never compatible with 3.5" floppies, and always were enumerated using the first available external storage letter (ie, D: in typical machines).

You're right! Thank you for the correction.

I've had a lot of fun training Markov chains using Simple English Wikipedia. I'm guessing the restricted vocabulary leads to more overlapping sentences in the training data. Anything too advanced or technical has too many unique phrases and the output degrades almost immediately.

You're missing the input type, essentially. Those are just array types. The TypeScript type signature more of a function type, it expresses flattening a n-dimensional array (input type) into a flat array (output type).