Reimplements in C
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
change code so it no longer segfaults
still is UB, has arbitrary code execution vulnerability
everybody dies
Reimplements in C
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
change code so it no longer segfaults
still is UB, has arbitrary code execution vulnerability
everybody dies
Edit: the meme says “closed source” which is patently false for Mongo
No, MongoDB is closed source, proprietary software. You might be confusing open source with source available.
Edit: Actually I am wrong sorry. Closed source is not the opposite of open source. I didn’t read your comment exactly enough. MongoDB is not open source, it’s not free software, it is source available and thus not closed source. The things below are still true but don’t contradict what you said.
The SSPL is not a free software license and it is not an open source license. The OSI said so:
https://blog.opensource.org/the-sspl-is-not-an-open-source-license/
Well it being in the middle of a desert makes it more wasteful.
But yes giant festivals that encourage a lot of travel and needlessly burning things are in general wasteful and potentially excessive. There are other leisure activities, so discouraging festivals is not equivalent to working nonstop.
The S22 charges at a maximum of 45W. That’s technically within the 60W limit that all USB-C cable can handle. I could not find how exactly how the charging works but it’s possible that they are doing something like 9V @ 5A and thus are requiring a 240W or 100W cable. However it looks like in this particular case it might not matter.
GSMArena says the Galaxy S22+ charged to full in 62 minutes on the 25 W charger and 61 minutes on the 45 W charger. The Ultra took 59 minutes on the 45 W charger and 64 minutes on the 25 W charger.
What kind of phone do you have? All USB-C cables should be able to do at least 60W charging.
That’s not really true. The E-Marker in the cable does not do the negotiations. Its involved in it but its not as complicated as you make it sound. There are a total of 3 different completely backwards compatible cable types in regards to power delivery. 60W , 100W (which is legacy) and 240W.
Actually the naming scheme you propose e.g. USB4 80Gb is the real naming scheme! It’s officially what the specification demands manufacturers label their products. “USB4 version 2” and so on are explicitly only the names of the internal standards that only concern people writing drivers or designing chips.
I have no idea what tech journalist are smoking. This has been a problems for so many years but they keep using the internal names. I mean nobody is complaining about having to always say “IEEE 802.11bn” instead of WI-FI 8