im getting the list of IDEs from the 2024 stack overflow survey. if your IDE isnt on here you can comment it below, where no one will care everyone will be amazed at how unique you are

VSCode - 43 votes

VS - 14 votes

IntelliJ IDEA - 9 votes

Notepad ++ - 26 votes

Vim - 15 votes

Android Studio - 3 votes

PyCharm - 7 votes

Jupyter - 4 votes

NeoVim - 6 votes

Emacs - 4 votes

XCode - 1 votes

Nano - 3 votes

VSCodium - 4 votes

None of the above - 18 votes

!codecels GET IN HERE

Feels like phones haven't gotten better in at least 10 years.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/stratasys-sues-bambu-lab-over-patents-used-widely-by-consumer-3d-printers/

!codecels

The girls are using ChatGPT to see if men are lying about their height on dating apps.

Upload 4 pictures, it uses proportions and surroundings to estimate height.

I tested it on 10 friends & family members - all estimates were within 1 inch of their real height 🤯 pic.twitter.com/5d5WI8eIE6

— Justine Moore (@venturetwins) August 11, 2024

!biofoids

https://news.patreon.com/articles/understanding-apple-requirements-for-patreon

Apple has also made clear that if creators on Patreon […] disable transactions in the iOS app, we will be at risk of having the entire app removed from their App Store.

Biggest Cute twink Award goes to this comment:

stalfosknight 1 hour ago

As a user, I welcome this change if it means it becomes possible to easily cancel Patreon subscriptions with a single click in my device settings instead of having to go through Patreon's cancellation process. Patreon makes it a completely unnecessary pain in the butt to cancel multiple subscriptions.

It seems like only Apple gives a shit about making things easy to cancel and I find it hard to have any empathy for companies / developers that make canceling things painful.

Tim Sweeney (Epic Games) and Elon are on the case:

(Epic previously sued Apple)

Link to Tweet because embeds are bad opsec

!zoomers

!codecels

Posting because it's interesting but also:

Zak 1 hour ago

I have mixed feelings here. On the other hand, there's a trend for social media platforms lately to downrank anything that's not advertiser-friendly whether it's Facebook posts containing profanity or Youtube videos about guns. I don't think tech billionaires suing each other about it is an ideal resolution, but I don't like this trend.

afsdgiadnion 1 hour ago [flagged] [dead]

Musk is so personally odious that people would boycott Twitter even if it were a flower shop. He has literally praised Adolf Hitler for his handling of Jews. He's a Nazi.

This is not, primarily, about social media moderation.

afsdgiadnion 1 hour ago [flagged] [dead]

This really isn't complicated. Musk accused Jews (by name) of conspiring against the white race. He praised Adolf Hitler (by name) for his handling of Jews. Advertisers panicked and fled en masse. No court is going to compel advertisers to fund neo-Nazi propaganda.

kevinh 1 hour ago

So this non-lawyer read the initial complaint, looked into two cases, and thinks he has a meaningful understanding of how the lawsuit is going to go? Why is some random layman's opinion given any weight here?

dangpeepee 52 minutes ago [dead]

Everyone's opinion has value libertarian c*nt.

https://www.catb.org/jargon/html/story-of-mel.html

The Story of Mel

This was posted to Usenet by its author, Ed Nather ([email protected]), on May 21, 1983.

A recent article devoted to the macho side of programming

made the bald and unvarnished statement:

Real Programmers write in FORTRAN.

Maybe they do now,

in this decadent era of

Lite beer, hand calculators, and "user-friendly" software

but back in the Good Old Days,

when the term "software" sounded funny

and Real Computers were made out of drums and vacuum tubes,

Real Programmers wrote in machine code.

Not FORTRAN. Not RATFOR. Not, even, assembly language.

Machine Code.

Raw, unadorned, inscrutable hexadecimal numbers.

Directly.

Lest a whole new generation of programmers

grow up in ignorance of this glorious past,

I feel duty-bound to describe,

as best I can through the generation gap,

how a Real Programmer wrote code.

I'll call him Mel,

because that was his name.

I first met Mel when I went to work for Royal McBee Computer Corp.,

a now-defunct subsidiary of the typewriter company.

The firm manufactured the LGP-30,

a small, cheap (by the standards of the day)

drum-memory computer,

and had just started to manufacture

the RPC-4000, a much-improved,

bigger, better, faster — drum-memory computer.

Cores cost too much,

and weren't here to stay, anyway.

(That's why you haven't heard of the company,

or the computer.)

I had been hired to write a FORTRAN compiler

for this new marvel and Mel was my guide to its wonders.

Mel didn't approve of compilers.

"If a program can't rewrite its own code",

he asked, "what good is it?"

Mel had written,

in hexadecimal,

the most popular computer program the company owned.

It ran on the LGP-30

and played blackjack with potential customers

at computer shows.

Its effect was always dramatic.

The LGP-30 booth was packed at every show,

and the IBM salesmen stood around

talking to each other.

Whether or not this actually sold computers

was a question we never discussed.

Mel's job was to re-write

the blackjack program for the RPC-4000.

(Port? What does that mean?)

The new computer had a one-plus-one

addressing scheme,

in which each machine instruction,

in addition to the operation code

and the address of the needed operand,

had a second address that indicated where, on the revolving drum,

the next instruction was located.

In modern parlance,

every single instruction was followed by a GO TO!

Put that in Pascal's pipe and smoke it.

Mel loved the RPC-4000

because he could optimize his code:

that is, locate instructions on the drum

so that just as one finished its job,

the next would be just arriving at the "read head"

and available for immediate execution.

There was a program to do that job,

an "optimizing assembler",

but Mel refused to use it.

"You never know where it's going to put things",

he explained, "so you'd have to use separate constants".

It was a long time before I understood that remark.

Since Mel knew the numerical value

of every operation code,

and assigned his own drum addresses,

every instruction he wrote could also be considered

a numerical constant.

He could pick up an earlier "add" instruction, say,

and multiply by it,

if it had the right numeric value.

His code was not easy for someone else to modify.

I compared Mel's hand-optimized programs

with the same code massaged by the optimizing assembler program,

and Mel's always ran faster.

That was because the "top-down" method of program design

hadn't been invented yet,

and Mel wouldn't have used it anyway.

He wrote the innermost parts of his program loops first,

so they would get first choice

of the optimum address locations on the drum.

The optimizing assembler wasn't smart enough to do it that way.

Mel never wrote time-delay loops, either,

even when the balky Flexowriter

required a delay between output characters to work right.

He just located instructions on the drum

so each successive one was just past the read head

when it was needed;

the drum had to execute another complete revolution

to find the next instruction.

He coined an unforgettable term for this procedure.

Although "optimum" is an absolute term,

like "unique", it became common verbal practice

to make it relative:

"not quite optimum" or "less optimum"

or "not very optimum".

Mel called the maximum time-delay locations

the "most pessimum".

After he finished the blackjack program

and got it to run

("Even the initializer is optimized",

he said proudly),

he got a Change Request from the sales department.

The program used an elegant (optimized)

random number generator

to shuffle the "cards" and deal from the "deck",

and some of the salesmen felt it was too fair,

since sometimes the customers lost.

They wanted Mel to modify the program

so, at the setting of a sense switch on the console,

they could change the odds and let the customer win.

Mel balked.

He felt this was patently dishonest,

which it was,

and that it impinged on his personal integrity as a programmer,

which it did,

so he refused to do it.

The Head Salesman talked to Mel,

as did the Big Boss and, at the boss's urging,

a few Fellow Programmers.

Mel finally gave in and wrote the code,

but he got the test backwards,

and, when the sense switch was turned on,

the program would cheat, winning every time.

Mel was delighted with this,

claiming his subconscious was uncontrollably ethical,

and adamantly refused to fix it.

After Mel had left the company for greener pa$ture$,

the Big Boss asked me to look at the code

and see if I could find the test and reverse it.

Somewhat reluctantly, I agreed to look.

Tracking Mel's code was a real adventure.

I have often felt that programming is an art form,

whose real value can only be appreciated

by another versed in the same arcane art;

there are lovely gems and brilliant coups

hidden from human view and admiration, sometimes forever,

by the very nature of the process.

You can learn a lot about an individual

just by reading through his code,

even in hexadecimal.

Mel was, I think, an unsung genius.

Perhaps my greatest shock came

when I found an innocent loop that had no test in it.

No test. None.

Common sense said it had to be a closed loop,

where the program would circle, forever, endlessly.

Program control passed right through it, however,

and safely out the other side.

It took me two weeks to figure it out.

The RPC-4000 computer had a really modern facility

called an index register.

It allowed the programmer to write a program loop

that used an indexed instruction inside;

each time through,

the number in the index register

was added to the address of that instruction,

so it would refer

to the next datum in a series.

He had only to increment the index register

each time through.

Mel never used it.

Instead, he would pull the instruction into a machine register,

add one to its address,

and store it back.

He would then execute the modified instruction

right from the register.

The loop was written so this additional execution time

was taken into account —

just as this instruction finished,

the next one was right under the drum's read head,

ready to go.

But the loop had no test in it.

The vital clue came when I noticed

the index register bit,

the bit that lay between the address

and the operation code in the instruction word,

was turned on —

yet Mel never used the index register,

leaving it zero all the time.

When the light went on it nearly blinded me.

He had located the data he was working on

near the top of memory —

the largest locations the instructions could address —

so, after the last datum was handled,

incrementing the instruction address

would make it overflow.

The carry would add one to the

operation code, changing it to the next one in the instruction set:

a jump instruction.

Sure enough, the next program instruction was

in address location zero,

and the program went happily on its way.

I haven't kept in touch with Mel,

so I don't know if he ever gave in to the flood of

change that has washed over programming techniques

since those long-gone days.

I like to think he didn't.

In any event,

I was impressed enough that I quit looking for the

offending test,

telling the Big Boss I couldn't find it.

He didn't seem surprised.

When I left the company,

the blackjack program would still cheat

if you turned on the right sense switch,

and I think that's how it should be.

I didn't feel comfortable

hacking up the code of a Real Programmer.

This is one of hackerdom's great heroic epics, free verse or no. In a few spare images it captures more about the esthetics and psychology of hacking than all the scholarly volumes on the subject put together. (But for an opposing point of view, see the entry for Real Programmer.)

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/10/business/susan-wojcicki-dead.html

https://x.com/dmitrygr/status/1822112026963169325

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41207221

bottom text

Orange site discussion

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41197300

tl;dr version: Chink software made by some university student studying CS in china, that he sells as a subscription service to other chink lowlifes to use. The software sends out scam texts to Americans. The scam texts say that USPS is holding a package for them and that they need to provide credit card number, social security number, etc to receive the package. The message contains a link to a fake website set up by the chink that looks exactly like the real USPS website and which steals your info. The authors wife has a foid moment and falls for one of these scam messages, author finds out his wife got scammed and does the chad thing and gives the info about the scam to """another hacker""" and asks them to hack them. The """hacker""" who is totally not the author then hacks the chinks shitty scam software and leaks everything and doxxes the chink.

Basically these chinaman straggots are the ones behind those annoying fake USPS texts that you get if you live in burgerland

Come on Kamela, just promise us that you will make hacking our enemies legal so we can scam these chink cute twinks back. I would love to make some money scamming or hacking russiods and chinks

i’m sorry what the actual fuck pic.twitter.com/LSILoA8Z1a

— TracketPacer (@TracketPacer) August 9, 2024

https://old.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1eo0u6m/sinkclose_flaw_in_hundreds_of_millions_of_amd/

https://old.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/1eo0zly/sinkclose_flaw_in_hundreds_of_millions_of_amd/

https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/1eo0ecz/sinkclose_exploit_on_amd_processors_requires_ring/

https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1eo0s23/sinkclose_flaw_in_hundreds_of_millions_of_amd/

https://old.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/1eo1e40/sinkclose_flaw_in_hundreds_of_millions_of_amd/

https://boards.4chan.org/g/thread/101800861

https://x.com/FinanceLancelot/status/1821886531595801005#m

https://x.com/a_greenberg/status/1821880264072855681#m

Oh you want to post here chud? That'll be tree fiddy.

!mottezans finally we can have /r/acescience for high iq intralexual discussion only

https://archive.ph/vTlH1

Probably another but that came quicker than I expected

Why are rust programmers like this?

advanced voice mode is actually insane. there was a tweet that went viral last week showing chatgpt counting to 50 super fast, and stopping to catch its breath like a human

somewhat off topic but the dude who wrote this article is named "kyle wiggers"

also this morning openAI released some gay statement about how ai safety i didnt read it because i dont care

ALSO free users can create TWO free dalle-3 images per day!

can i say something without everyone getting mad https://t.co/AlsisccHFq

— sankalp (@dejavucoder) August 8, 2024