Programming in Rust is a constant negotiation with the compiler. That isn't necessarily good or bad but I have far more control in Zig, and flexibility in Java.
Yes, there is a learning curve to Rust, but once you get proficient, it no longer bothers you. I think this is more good than bad, because, for example, look at Bun, it is written in Zig, it has so many bugs. They had a bug in their filesystem API that freezed your process, and it stayed unfixed for at least half a year after I filed it. Zig is a nice C replacement, but it doesn't have the same correctness guardrails as Rust.
Assuming we're talking about the same bug, The filesystem API freeze wasn't caused by Zig's lack of correctness guarantees, but a design flaw in Bun's implementation.
Maybe I'm stupid, but I never actually understood people who blame programming languages for bugs in software. Because sure, it's good to have guardrails, but in my opinion, if you're writing a program and there's a bug, unless this bug lies somewhere in implementation of compiler/interpreter/etc, you can't blame the tooling, It's you who introduced this bug. It was your mistake.
It's cool when your tooling warns you about potential bugs or mistakes in implementation, but it's still your responsibility to write the correct code. If you pick up a hammer and hit your finger instead of the nail, then in most cases (though not always) it’s your own fault.
When millions of users constantly make the same mistake with the tool, there may be a problem with the tool, whether it's a defect in the tool or just that it's inappropriate for the job. Blaming the user might give one a righteous feeling, but decade after decade that approach has failed to actually fix any problems.
That's why I say "in most cases" - so not always, actually. There might be problems with tools, I'm not trying to deny that. And by the way, what if some (or even most) of the users just don't have enough skill to use the tool properly? Again, there could be a problem with tool, yes, but you can't always blame only tools for mistakes users make.
I am talking about this bug. It looks like it is still unfixed, in the sense, there is a PR fixing it, but it wasn't merged. LOL.
Regardless of whether this specific bug would be caught by Rust compiler, Bun in general is notorious for crashing, just look at how many open issues there are, how many crashes.
Not saying that you cannot make a correct program in Zig, but I prefer having checks that Rust compiler does, to not having them.
I live very close to one of the USAF's largest European airbases.
While Trump was trolling European leaders about their security posture (by threatening to relieve them of sovereign territory which the US already has extensive access to) the USAF was already moving assets in the opposite direction to the middle east (this was mid-january).
It's fairly easy to work out what's happening if you ignore the orange man and listen to what serious people are saying, what they've briefed on, how they contradict one another, and where the assets are moving.
Obviously European leaders have to pretend to take the orange man seriously, but the reaction in the media was bordering on hysterical.
This is exactly right. The liar who lies to control the narrative is lying again. The chance he’s lying is high but as adults the (likelihood * hazard) of an invasion is worth preparing for.
The narrative he wanted to control was about Epstein. Denmark could have simultaneously prepared for that, but it wouldn’t be on OSInt Twitter.
More precisely, propaganda is always fake. After verification it’s possibly true, but it still began fake. Trump could try supporting his utterances with fact, but he doesn’t.
It’s rational to prepare for his propaganda to sometimes accidentally turn out true. Hence this relatively modest response. But the narrative most reliably supported by fact is that Trump hasn’t kept his story straight about Epstein.
The Kuwaiti air force doesn't use F-15E. The F-15E looks quite similar to the Iranian Mig-29 especially from above. I've got no idea how Kuwaiti fast jet pilots are trained but it's not inconceivable that pilot had never seen an F-15E in the flesh before.
>> it's not inconceivable that pilot had never seen an F-15E in the flesh before.
This is such a joke I cant even imagine how you can formulate this thought...
- Exercise Marauder Shield 26.1 (Nov. 2025)
"U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle aircraft assigned to the 391st Expeditionary Fighter Squadron takeoff during Exercise Marauder Shield in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, Nov. 8, 2025. A key element of the exercise was the sharpening of combined fighter capabilities between the U.S. and Kuwait Air Forces. This included joint training exercises and hot-pit refueling operations."
- CENTCOM Bomber Task Force mission (July 2022)
"..During the BTF, two B-52H Stratofortresses, assigned to the U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command, conducted theater integration training and operations with a variety of U.S. Air Force, partner and ally aircraft, including F-15/18, RJ-135, E-3, KC-135/10/46, FGR-4, and A-330..."
"The bombers’ flight originated at Royal Air Force (RAF) Fairford, England, and flew over the Eastern Mediterranean, Arabian Peninsula and Red Sea before departing the region. The mission included fighter escorts from the Royal Air Force and the Air Forces of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia...."
"...“Communication is critical,” said Wong, who also serves as the Deputy Director of Combat Operations, Combined Air Operations Center. “By enhancing lines of communication, we are able to establish a clear and direct line in real time amongst the Air Operations Centers of all nations participating..."
> A key element of the exercise was the sharpening of combined fighter capabilities between the U.S. and Kuwait Air Forces
Well, the Kuwaitis seem pretty sharp? Three shootdowns is a lot in the modern era. The F-22 program only has two air to air kills in its whole history.
Do they? If they shot down 3 friendly aircraft that would be a catastrophically stupid mistake which would imply they are, in fact, not that sharp (or at least this specific unit and chain of command).
> The F-22 program only has two air to air kills in its whole history
A very poor comparison point given that the F-22 has had limited opportunities for engagement. And just a poor comparison overall.
It is very easy to shoot down friendly aircraft because they don't usually shoot back. They fly in nice straight lines because they don't expect to be shot down at any moment by their allies. They don't employ ECM against you. They don't terrain mask. But, maybe you are joking?
None of the other air forces involved shot down three F-15s, so I don't think it's that easy.
If I'm skimming this page [1] well enough (find: "shot down"), there's only 6 F-15s that have been shot down, and only 4 or them were air-to-air. If it's so easy, should be more than one other incident, and that guy only got one.
Kuwaiti air force F/A-18 pilots receive most of their training in the USA so most likely they would have seen some F-15 model in flight. That doesn't rule out a case of target misidentification but it's very odd and suspicious.
I do not know how F-18 controls work but from what I understand lots of jet controls include the equivalent of a "safety" that can be used to prevent the weapon from being launched. Maybe the pilot thought he had it engaged?
The secondary thing here I've realized is that the missiles in question must not have been using active homing. If they were then the pilots of the US aircraft would have taken evasive action as soon as their radar warning receiver lit up.
The IFF system will trigger warning symbology on various cockpit displays but it won't prevent the pilot from employing weapons. At this point we don't know for certain whether IFF was enabled and working correctly on any of the aircraft involved.
Yeah, you're absolutely right. I was just thinking yesterday ... that because the majority of reading I do now is output from chatbots, I'm starting to think and write like a chatbot.
A little terrifying. Probably the solution is to read 19th century literature before bed.
Feel free to ask for more details if you have specific questions! I worked in robotics for many years, I have some decent familiarity with this space. Here’s some more detailed thoughts “for free”:
Humanoid robotics are largely a publicity stunt. Our actuators, sensors, and algorithms are better adapted to other form factors. The nice thing about humanoids is that you (in theory) don’t have to change the interface, since they can use the same interface humans can use. In practice that doesn’t hold well, because we don’t have great force/pressure sensors to cover large areas like human skin. Likewise, it’s difficult to apply the fine forces that are sometimes needed (grabbing an egg, moving a joystick, etc). And there’s risk of the robot doing something unpredictable, so you always have to set a good safety bound around it anyways. In the end it’s often better to adapt the process to modern robotics, rather than the other way around.
This database exposed half a million weekend cases which were heard with zero press notification. Many grooming gang trials were heard this way. The database is being deleted weeks before the national inquiry into the grooming gang cover up begins, and the official reason for deleting the data is nonsensical.
Along with the attempt to prevent jury trials for all but the most serious criminal cases, this is beginning to look like an attempt to prevent reporting on an upcoming case. I can think of one happening in April, involving the prime minister. Given he was head of the CPS for 5 years, would know exactly which levers to pull.
Why do you think "they" are trying to suppress reporting on a Russian-recruited Ukranian national carrying out arson attacks against properties the PM is "linked to" but does not live in? What's the supposed angle?
And how exactly is eliminating a third party search tool for efficiently searching lots of obscure magistrates court proceedings going to stop journalists from paying attention to a spicy court case linked to foreign agents and the PM?
5 Ukrainians. People have traced what some of them were doing professionally when the PM would've been living there. It could be nothing, but we need transparency.
Programming in Rust is a constant negotiation with the compiler. That isn't necessarily good or bad but I have far more control in Zig, and flexibility in Java.
reply