They wouldn't have to, if the file format accepted floats in proper exponential format.

> Garbage collection, by definition, trashes locality.

No, it doesn't necessarily. It is correct if you are thinking about mark and sweep GC. But that is 50 years old. Generational GC has much better locality. And GC can even improve locality sometimes by moving objects together that are connected by references. I am not claiming that GC is always a big win for locality. That would be very far from the truth. On the other hand it is not by definition so, that locality is trashed by GC.

OMG no. Politician have no business making technological decisions. They make it harder to innovate, i.e. to invent the next generation of ECC with a different name.

I would argue that in the present conditions, regulation can actually foster and guide real innovation.

With no regulations in place, companies would rather innovate in profit extraction rather improving technology. And if they have enough market capture, they may actually prefer to not innovate, if that would hurt profits.

ECC is like Ethernet. The name doesn’t have to change for the technology to update.

If companies are allowed to change the meaning of terms in legislation we are in even more trouble.

Ethernet was once carried over thick coax at like 2 then 3 megabits per second. By the time it was standardized as IEEE 802.3 it was at 10 megabits. 802.3 was thin coax. 802.3e took a step back in speed to 1 megabit, but over phone-type wire. 10 base T, Ethernet over twisted pair at 10 megabits per second, wasn’t until 802.3i in 1990. Then 10 base F (fiber) in 1992.

Then there are various speeds of 100 M, 1000 M / 1G, 2.5 G, 5 G, 10 G, 25 G 40 G, 50G, 100 G, 200 G, and 400 G. Some of the media included twisted pair, single mode fiber, multimode fiver, twinax cable, Ethernet over backplanes, passive fiber connections (EPON), and over DWDM systems.

There have also been multiple versions of power over Ethernet using twisted pair cable. Some are over one pair, some two pairs, and some over the data pairs while other use dedicated pairs for power.

There are also standards for negotiation among multiple of these speeds. There have been improvements to timestamping. There have been standards to bring newer speeds to fewer pairs or current speeds over longer distances.

There’s currently work on 1.6 Tbps links up to 30 or possibly 50 meters. There has been work on the past to use plastic optical fibers instead of glass ones. Oh, and there are standards specific to automative Ethernet.

Ethernet itself, the name and the first implementation of a network with that name, were from 1972 and 1973. It was on the market in 1980 and first standardized in 1983 as ECMA-82.

Ethernet supports in its different configurations direct host-to-host connections, daisy chains, hubbed networks, switched networks, tunnels over routed protocols like TCP or UDP, bridges over technologies like MOCA or WiFi, and even being tunneled across the open Internet.

All of these are Ethernet. They have a common lineage. They are all derived from the same origin. Token Ring, FDDI, ATM, and SONET have all been more than one thing over time too. So has WiFi. 802.11a is very little like 802.11be, but those are also similar enough to carry the same family name.

The IEEE 802.3 series has a lot of history buried in those documents.

Politicians don’t have to be dumb.

Reading this again, did you forget your trailing /s?

The same panel produces much more electricity in space than at the bottom of the atmosphere, because the atmosphere already reflects most of the light. Additionally, the panel needs less glass or no glass in space, which makes it lighter and cheaper.

Launch costs have shrunk significantly thanks to SpaceX, and they are projected to shrink further with the Super Heavy Booster and Starship.

Self-cataloging can be become a method of procrastination. But that doesn't mean that there is no value to be found in methods like Zettelkasten. The activity of looking through your own Zettelkasten has the potential of creating associations and sparking ideas. That can be very valuable and requires some care of your notes. But trying to find the perfect taxonomy for your own notes is foolish mistake. The technical limitations of the original Zettelkasten, makes refactoring the notes to the current approximation of the perfect taxonomy such a huge task, that it is usually avoided.

A nice example of a limitation that supports creativity.

So, in order to avoid the negative consequences of a European monopoly, we make sure that a Chinese monopoly prevails? That doesn't seem like a wining strategy for Europe.

Even if we assume that JSON numbers are JavaScript numbers. There is the problem that some large natural numbers cannot be represented in double or float although some even larger numbers can be represented. This is very bad if you use these numbers as IDs.

    scala> (Long.MaxValue-1)
    val res4: Long = 9223372036854775806
                                                                                
    scala> (Long.MaxValue-1).toDouble.toLong
    val res5: Long = 9223372036854775807

The fact that I used Scala is irrelevant here. That is true for many programming languages that 64 bit long and double types.

But that problem is not inherent to JSON, which is a pain text encoding of those numbers.

Because, Truffle is reused in multiple language VMs their overall attack surface is smaller than it would be with classical language VM architectures.

But with a visible scrollbar you would have a visible indication which behavior you triggered. If the scrollbar is invisible you get a changed viewport in both cases but you have to infer which gesture triggers which behavior.

No, when you use a scrollbar it becomes visible, so you get exactly the same indication

And still there are more modern idioms and language features that ML had in the 70s but are missing from Go. But, these have the fatal flaw of Not being Invented Here.