I have a framework. I’m not aware of any others though. But I do remember that physical wifi switches were common on HPs back about 15-20 years ago.

Get a laptop with hardware switches for the camera and microphone, tbh

https://news.rice.edu/news/2025/mathematical-methods-point-possibility-particles-long-thought-impossible

Link to original press release

A problem that only affects newbies huh?

Let’s say that you are writing code intended to be deployed headless in the field, and it should not be allowed to exit in an uncontrolled fashion because there are communications that need to happen with hardware to safely shut them down. You’re making a autonomous robot or something.

Using python for this task isn’t too out of left field, because one of the major languages of ROS is python, and it’s the most common one.

Which of the following python standard library functions can throw, and what do they throw?

bytes, hasattr, len, super, zip

Paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927650524001130?via%3Dihub

Seems to be free access, for now

Oh, I’ll try to describe Euler’s formula in a way that is intuitive, and maybe you could have come up with it too.

So one way to think about complex numbers, and perhaps an intuitive one, is as a generalization of “positiveness” and “negativeness” from a binary to a continuous thing. Notice that if we multiply -1 with -1 we get 1, so we might think that maybe we don’t have a straight line of positiveness and negativeness, but perhaps it is periodic in some manner.

We can envision that perhaps the imaginary unit, i, is “halfway between” positive and negative, because if we think about what √(-1) could possibly be, the only thing that makes sense is it’s some form of 1 where you have to use it twice to make something negative instead of just once. Then it stands to reason that √i is “halfway between” i and 1 in this scale of positive and negative.

If we figure out what number √i we get √2/2 + √2/2 i

(We can find this by saying (a + bi)^(2) = i, which gives us (a^(2) - b^(2) = 0 and 2ab = 1) we get a = b from the first, and a^(2) = 1/2)

The keen eyed observer might notice that this value is also equal to sin(45°) and we start to get some ideas about how all of the complex numbers with radius 1 might be somewhat special and carry their own amount of “positiveness” or “negativeness” that is somehow unique to it.

So let’s represent these values with R ∠ θ where the θ represents the amount of positiveness or negativeness in some way.

Since we’ve observed that √i is located at the point 45° from the positive real axis, and i is on the imaginary axis, 90° from the positive real axis, and -1 is 180° from the positive real axis, and if we examine each of these we find that if we use cos to represent the real axis and sin to represent the imaginary axis. That’s really neat. It means we can represent any complex number as R ∠ θ = cos θ + i sin θ.

What happens if we multiply two complex numbers in this form? Well, it turns out if you remember your trigonometry, you exactly get the angle addition formulas for sin and cos. So R ∠ θ * S ∠ φ = RS ∠ θ + φ. But wait a second. That’s turning multiplication into an addition? Where have we seen something like this before? Exponent rules.

We have a^(n) * a^(m) = a^(n+m) what if, somehow, this angle formula is also an exponent in disguise?

Then you’re learning calculus and you come across Taylor Series and you learn a funny thing, the Taylor series of e^x looks a lot like the Taylor series of sine and cosine.

And actually, if we look at the Taylor series for e^(ix) is exactly matches the Taylor series for cos x + i sin x. So our supposition was correct, it was an exponent in disguise. How wild. Finally we get:

R ∠ θ = Re^(iθ) = cos θ + i sin θ

What god formula?

No, I just understand math. So yes.

Well, 13 microarcseconds is the resolution they claim to be shooting for. The nearest star is 4.2 light-years away. 13 microarcseconds at 4.2 light-years is 2500km, the earth is about 12742 km in diameter. So we can theoretically take an approximately 5x5 pixel image of Proxima Centauri b.

Please don’t tell me you, unironically, actually use the Carmack rsqrt function in the year of our Linux Desktop 2024.

Also if you like, you can write unsafe Rust in safe Rust instead.

std::mem::transmute

Trigraphs are handled by the preprocessor, so if you’re not handling that, then that’s fine. Digraphs are handled by the tokenizer, however.

Are digraphs and trigraphs deprecated?

Did you reference the standard?

It’s at least partially because the specification was designed to detect and thwart attempts to tee the video and audio data in order to bypass copy protection on DVDs and Blu-Rays, iirc.

deleted by creator

This doesn’t specifically use the template metaprogramming interface for C++, but seems to do what you want regardless. https://github.com/jmmartinez/easy-just-in-time

I’ve never used the library myself though.

Yup

That episode aired in March 2002.

LHC began operating in 2010 and the Higgs Boson was confirmed in 2012.

The focus of the 2002 episode was on the SSC, the boondoggle of a collider that was being built in Texas and was cancelled in 1993.

Yeah, definitely :)

The default dev profile is defined as:

[profile.dev]
opt-level = 0
debug = true
split-debuginfo = '...'  # Platform-specific.
strip = "none"
debug-assertions = true
overflow-checks = true
lto = false
panic = 'unwind'
incremental = true
codegen-units = 256
rpath = false

You can find more information in the cargo book page on profiles

As mentioned in the article, this concerns release mode, which already does not have symbols by default for user code. It does have symbols for the standard library code, however, due to how the binaries for the standard library are shipped (i.e. with symbols only). This change simply also removes standard library symbols.

If you need symbols, you can use default debugging build, or if you need both compiler optimizations and debugging symbols you can create a custom profile that inherets from release with debug = true. The second you already need to do to get full debugging symbols right now, so this isn’t really much of a change from a workflow standpoint.