Close enough for government work, actually. And it's not just flesh. Lots of things behave approximately like water, which is handy for all sorts of back-of-envelope estimates.
This is fantastic progress for CPython. I had almost given up hope that CPython would overcome the GIL after first hitting its limitations over 10 years ago.
That being said I strongly believe that because of the sharp edges on async style code vs proper co-routine-based user threads like go-routines and Java virtual threads Python is still far behind optimal parallelism patterns.
Aren't go-routines the worst of all worlds? Sharp edges, undefined behavior galore? At least that was my takeaway when last using about 5 or 6 years ago. Did they fix go-routines in the meantime?
It’s hard to answer without specifics but languages shouldn’t require you to determine whether it’s safe to use an api in an async context or whether it will hang your app. I imagine some of the sharp edges you might have run into are because go has real parallelism and you have to address data sharing.
The sharp edges in Go are when you try to use the built-in mechanisms that are supposed to replace data sharing - e.g. channels - only to discover the numerous footguns that abound there.
And then there's patently stupid design decisions like using raw slices as collections and the maybe-change-maybe-copy semantics of append() that don't make it easier to reason about shared data when it needs to be shared.
The shutter prevents someone (including children) shoving something metal into the live/hot. I have never heard of it failing. Newer US outlets (TR/tamper resistant) are way more finicky because of the optional ground pin. Sticking the little plastic covers over the outlet is a workaround.
The reason for a fuse is because of the high current capacity of ring circuits vs branch/radial. The fuse protects the power cable of appliances catching fire as they can’t handle the current available on the circuit .
Ring circuits are a thing due to minimizing copper usage when rebuilding after ww2.
TR: I know why they did it, but I'm not a fan of the tradeoff. I don't think making all the sockets worse is the solution, people with kids can just baby proof their place (I have a toddler, and we baby proofed our house).
Fuse: I'm not familiar with ring circuits and everything you mentioned, though I was aware it's for fires. Other places (and the UK as well in most apartments I had) have centralized fuse boxes. Is this still needed?
Either way, these are reasons for why things were done the way they were done, but reasons aside, the usability is inferior.
They still have a centralised box but each connection goes in a ring from the box and back to it again. This way you can use thinner wire for the same total capacity.
Sadly it carried on for far too long, my house built in the nineties has it.
UK central fuse boxes don't have a fuse/RCD per socket. For example, mine has common ones for the kitchen, downstairs sockets, upstairs sockets, and all lighting -separate ones only for the boiler and cooker.
The wiring system was designed during world war II when there was a copper shortage and someone calculated that it used less to use larger conductors to several sockets than to run smaller individual ones to each socket.
TR in the US makes sockets harder to use, but I have never heard anyone complain about TR in the UK, as the earth/ground pin is always present, and is physically longer than the live and neutral, so mechanically it is reliable and unnoticeable.
“Just baby proof” means remembering to keep those little plastic covers in place in every outlet. That doesn’t seem like superior usability.
> The shutter prevents someone (including children) shoving something metal into the live/hot.
Child protected schuko sockets exist and work just fine. We have them installed in our place and I never had an issue with them. Neither do things fall out, nor can you poke at them with a screwdriver.
It at least has the virtualization framework now. There’s a product called Anka that plugs into Jenkins and lets you deploy macOS VM images as build agents on top of physical Apple hardware. While slower than containers, and limited to 2 VMs (?!?) you can have reproducible and sane build environments via VM images.
to install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software, or any prior macOS or OS X operating system software or subsequent release of the Apple Software, within virtual operating system environments on each Apple-branded computer you own or control that is already running the Apple Software, for purposes of: (a) software development; (b) testing during software development; (c) using macOS Server; or (d) personal, non-commercial use.
Apple just really doesn't care about you, and as a developer, you're just a sucker to extract money from.
Realistically you can run more than 2 VMs with some work[0], but legally companies that provide CI and other virtual solutions can't buy 1 mac then get a license to run 100 virtual macs.
(insert name of any corporation ... listed on any stock market) just really doesn't care about you, and as a developer, you're just a sucker to extract money from.
True, but for somewhat different reasons. For the OP, they take this approach because they simply don't know yet what the problem is, and it would take some time to track it down and fix it and they don't want to bother.
For Boeing, it's probably something fairly simple actually, but they don't want to fix it because their software has to go through a strict development process based on requirements and needing certification and testing, so fixing even a trivial bug is extremely time-consuming and expensive, so it's easier to just put a directive in the manual saying the equipment needs to be power-cycled every so often and let the users deal with it. The OP isn't dealing with this kind of situation.
There's a lot of chip packaging in Taiwan, Malaysia, and maybe Singapore so these A16s are probably racking up frequent flier miles. Probably not China though.
I think "for assembly" here means iPhone assembly, ie. the final SoC will be sent to China to assemble the iPhone. I don't think GP is referring to packaging.
The dies themselves are "assembled" - cut from the wafer, bonded to the wires (or solder bumps) that carry signals to the rest of the system, and packaged for physical protection and thermal management.
In recent times, multi-chiplet architecture has added its own layer of complexity to that process.
