I think the confusion may lie in the fact that gas powered vehicles do not have the same concern. Sure maintenance is required and all but you don't have the major drop in range just because the manufacturer pushes an update to "protect" your car. People expect their vehicles to work forever at original capacity.
Well bad news for all gas powered car owners: performance and mileage will degrade over time. Maybe not by a software update (unless you own a specific diesel car) but they will definitely degrade and quite significantly as well.
Edit: do note this applies to older cars, it's a bit slower than EVs but 10year old cars will not have the same mileage and power as a new one even with the same specifications.
> Well bad news for all gas powered car owners: performance and mileage will degrade over time. Maybe not by a software update (unless you own a specific diesel car) but they will definitely degrade and quite significantly as well.
This is not true, especially the part about "significantly".
The only real mechanism for a loss of performance over time would be if the engine's compression starts to drop as the rings get worn, but this isn't an issue on any modern engine.
Take a car with 10k miles and run it on a dyno. Dyno the same car again at 150k miles and it will probably be within 5%. In fact, performance may even go up as the motor "loosens" up.
Lime, actually ? Any data confirming that, and any explanation of such a behaviour, if true ? Like, one if my cars has around 300kw engine (400hp). How much I should lose in 10 years, if your claim is true ? And where are the losses ? I can't imagine anything besides loss of compression in cylinders, but that's tiny
Loss of compression comes from material breakdown, the other big one is from dirt build up. Dirt in the injectors causes bad spray pattern. Dirt in the cooling system reduces heat rejection. Dirt in the lube system increases friction losses. Dirt in the intake and exhaust causes pumping losses.
The amount of dirt a car is exposed to varies by 2-3 orders of magnitude between a farm truck compared to a sports car.
Rarely will you see an old sports car lose more than 20% power. Farm trucks lose 50%+, and the farmers keep running them until they just don't move at all.
*Side note, dirt does sometimes help. As a teen, I had an old ford festiva I shared with my brother. One day we washed the filthy engine bay and after that the thing would not idle. Turns out the dirty grease was plugging a vacuum leak around the pivot on the throttle valve.
I think people have a right to exist. If they are seeking asylum and they are not a threat, I think we should help each other out. Turning your backs on them because you don't like their race/religion goes against what America was supposed to be about. If we deport everyone who isn't legal knowing they'll either be killed or separated from their families, that speaks volumes about our country's morals and compassion. Deporting people because they don't "deserve" to be here is an extremely elitist attitude.
People have a right to exist in their own countries.
It would be unsustainable to let in everybody who wants to move to another country. That's why quotas, background checks, etc exist.
Entering a country illegally knowing that it will mean you'll be splitting your family in half speaks volumes about the morals and compassion of the person who does that.
I don't think it has anything to do with race or religion. There's not a country in the world with open borders. Most first world countries are actually harder to get into than the US.
It's odd to me that people started worrying about ICE en mass when Trump became president. It's an organization that has existed since 2003. In addition nearly every country in the world has similar or more stringent policies. Yet no one talks about that and they act as if ICE is unique in some capacity. It's hard to see that as anything other than politically motivated or misguided by media propaganda.
This reminds me of AspectJ in that its a language extension with many similar features (extension methods etc). As useful as those features were, the syntactic sugar you get is confusing to new contributors to a project.
Here's a scenario thats played out. In the extension methods example on the Manifold README, it's highlighted that you can add your own methods to Java types. If any dev saw this in the project and they were unaware of manifold, it wouldn't be immediately clear what enables the addition of methods to the Java String type. They would figure it out eventually by either investigating or by debugging. These features blur the lines between programming language and framework.
Where I get weary about adding a dependency is when I see documentation with ~100 line boilerplate examples peppered with terms I've never heard before. Just because you use the word simple when describing something complex does not make it so.
As the OP points out just-in-time code generation is a huge improvement over conventional alternatives. If anything it represents a step forward considering developer productivity.
