Yes, the first one matches only 2 more characters while the second matches 1 or more. Also the +? is a lazy quantifier so it will consume as little as possible.

They did say they haven’t learned the ? operator (that’s chapter 9 of the rust book), so this approach might be better for once they get there.

You can use expect on Options and Results to extract the value and panic on Error in the same line (https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/result/enum.Result.html#method.expect).

let html_content = reqwest::blocking::get(&permalink).expect("the request should succeed");

You can also use unwrap if you don’t need a custom message. The ? operator is definitely the most compact way of handling errors, and for good reason because the rust developers want people to use it. Once you learn that the code will become somewhat smaller.

fsck almost certainly isn’t going to cause loss of data, but it will likely inform you about a loss that already occurred if that is the issue you are having.

I would still say that getting people to the point where they can write safe C code every time is harder than learning Rust, as it’s equivalent to being able to write rust code that compiles without any safety issues (compiler errors) every single time, which is very difficult to do.

The agency (FTC) can seek civil penalties, I do not see anywhere that companies could bring a lawsuit that they couldn’t before (libel?).

A scripting language written in Rust would certainly fulfill you requirement of only needing to copy one file since they are always statically linked and you can even statically compile against musl so it will work on any Linux system without needing a correct libc. Maybe check out rhai.

Not really, that theorem says there are true things that cannot be proven, whereas this question is more about running out of proofs that you can make.

Historically it is a term used positively, for example in the expression ‘stay woke’ (1930s). So it is not really a reclamation, but rather a recent relegation by right wing people to a negative connotation. I have however heard some people legitimately use it in a positive manner, and some further reading on the Wikipedia page seems to support that even recently there are political leaders using it in a pro-racial equity sense.

@Carighan@lemmy.world

I would use the same definition as you, but that’s the only definition I can think of that would leave one thinking many people engage in animal cruelty. Unless your entire circle of friends is an illegal dogfighting ring.

It just seems very broad since people use it many ways “get woke” vs “the woke mob.” At least in the US it is used by people in both good and bad ways.

It depends on whether you think the existence of livestock is ‘mean to animals.’

Who do you mean by this?

A DNS based blocker wouldn’t block this, because the subscribe prompt is almost definitely being done by a script from the main NYT domain. The DNS blocker only blocks things that come from domains only used for things that should be blocked, and can’t differentiate between what type of content is being loaded (script vs image vs raw HTML) and definitely not between different things in the same class (paywall script vs the script that makes the buttons work).

Does it treat forks differently?

Why do you want to be less reliant on Wikipedia?

I don’t think there was anything in the article indicating the privacy of WhatsApp was actually breached, they got info by reading WhatsApp messages from other people in the chat who had already been arrested and from Apple.

This is just false, there is a mathematical framework for aggregating data in a way that prevents de-anonymization https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_privacy. This is what the US census department uses to release census statistics without impacting anyone’s privacy.

Unless you are verifying DNSSEC, they could intercept any outgoing DNS queries and replace the response with whatever they want, if you are using DNSSEC they won’t be able to modify the responses since they can’t create the signatures, but they could still send queries to their own server instead of your chosen server. With either of these options they can still see what you query. DNS over TLS or HTTPS is a way to prevent all of these things, since with those you know the endpoint of your HTTPS connection is the actual server with the signed certificate and the connection is encrypted.

Edit to add: it shouldn’t matter what DNS you use to look up the IP of the DoH/DoT server, because only the real servers should have the correct private key.

Why would they pay them, just use the power of the free market and raise the price of electricity (or even just for industrial users like bitcoin miners) when supply is low until they bow out because it’s not profitable and demands matches supply. Weird how the free market is only good when it’s not free, but dominated by monopolists.