All of the things you mentioned are designed and tested incrementally. Furthermore software has been used on Mars missions in the past, and that software was also developed incrementally. It’s proposed as the best way because it’s a way that has a track record
> All of the things you mentioned are designed and tested incrementally.
In a different way that what is proposed in this thread.
We don't build a small bridge and grow it. We build small bridges, develop a theory for building bridges and use that to design the big bridge.
I don't know of any theory of computing that would help us design a "big" program at once.
The compiler ensures you are writing memory safe code. Otherwise it rejects that code and helps you see the mistake you made. Why people are so upset when the compiler prevents them from building and shipping unusable code will always baffle me.
Theres a huge gap between inefficient and unusable. There’s a lot of usable code out there that leaks memory. I’d argue compilers are hardly pressed by memory usage given the transient nature of their execution.
Saying rust is unusable is pretty extreme. Tons of serious applications and infrastructure have been using it in production for years generating lots of money and preventing CVEs.
Leaking memory is sometimes not a huge issue. Missile allocation is real. Undefined behaviour, seg faults, data races, etc from edge cases slow down development.
The promise of rust isn't that it's super fast to learn but once you have you never deal with a swath of issues ever again.
And that's speaking from a deficit. Rust is an excellent language to do language development. It has arguably the best tooling for it in the ecosystem in my opinion and a vibrant community for it. Some of the most recent languages have foundations in rust. That is likely to continue going forward.
TLDR: Google Workspace for Education rug pulled schools on their "unlimited" plans, and the deadline is coming up to avoid paying extra fees. This was communicated in advance, but maybe still a bit quick for a large institution
> From: (Jan 2023)
We currently store 12.4 PB of data across all Google services, and our new storage cap, without significant additional fees, is 1.9 PB.
See the timeline [1]. They have been forcing the rest of the university to reduce their usage. Finally it's time for alumni. There's no need for a fuss on HN about this. There's a lot more belt tightening across the university.
I'm not seeing the legitimate use for 5GB of email. Delete your attachments and it has to be fine. Annoying? Sure, but you can search email for large attachments. How bad could it be. I'm sure they follow a power law, so deleting a few of them should do it for "legitimate" over-quota users.
The cost of 12,400TB of storage is on the order of $100,000. UC Berkeley has an annual budget of over $3,000,000,000, i.e. this is 0.003% of their annual budget. Also, it's Berkeley, they probably have that kind of hardware sitting around. They should just stop using Google services.
You're grossly underestimating the cost. With some amount of redundancy and growth that would be 24TB of drive capacity at least. You're looking at $250k in drives alone. You also need almost 100 servers to host that many drives, so another $250k. Then they'd have to pay maybe $500k/yr for three sysadmins (including benefits). Then some amount for tape backups, connectivity, electricity, maintenance.
Perhaps still peanuts for UC Berkeley and worth it, I don't know, but it's not just writing a 100k check.
Those hold 48 drives, so you'd need 20 of them and they're ~$300. It doesn't even move the needle.
> Then they'd have to pay maybe $500k/yr for three sysadmins (including benefits)
Why on earth would you need three sysadmins? After the initial setup this is a part time job for one person, and you probably already have that person because they're the ones dealing with all the problems caused by unreliable cloud vendors and forced SaaS software changes.
> Then some amount for tape backups, connectivity, electricity, maintenance.
Tape is cheap. Universities already have fiber. Maintenance contracts are for bureaucrats, you just use commodity parts and then keep a few spares. Electricity is going to be some tens of thousands of dollars a year. This is all still "on the order of $100,000", i.e. the price has that number of significant figures. Then annual cost is actually less because the drives etc. will last for more than a year.
Enforcing a carbon tax is trivial, since fossil fuel extraction is centralized. It does, however, require heavy tariffs against goods imported from countries that don't have carbon taxes.
A carbon tax would be very easy to implement in most countries since almost all carbon is extracted from the ground by just a handful of major corporations.
"An estimated 95% of all cars sold in the U.S. have automatic drive, versus less than 20% in Europe and Japan, where stick-shift is the overwhelming transmission of choice."
Still a good market globally, if not in the US. I'm more worried about EVs taking over than automatic transmissions.
Or you can call map_err to do an on-the-spot transformation if you don't have a general way to go from Error A to Error B.
I still sometimes make mistakes reading rust code with the ? at the end of the line, but it's just a question of what type is it and does the line return. Both of which are handled by the compiler in the end, so you get a little bit of extra knowledge that even if you misread the line of code, there's often limits to how much damage you can cause.
