Imagine the power that people with this type of sociopathic behavior will have if the governments of the world indeed regulate and limit access to this technology. They will be the only ones with full access to its potential and deciding who has access to what and in which capacity. It's mind boggling that we should consider that future as acceptable.

If someone were to ask me right now, without allowing me to look it up, what's the difference between a class and a struct, I would hands down give an unsatisfactory reply. And yet, if they asked me how would I approach designing a Job-Shop Scheduler for a weighted directed cyclic graph, I would hands down teach them a thing or two about problem solving. This photo was taken from a real interview at a large company:

One of my favorite movie shots of all time. Perfect!

He went on to invent AI next.

Who's the target of this press release? My deceased grandma? Are these people trolling us at this point?

Modern software developer interviews.

Look what I made!

Any description of nature that is unreachable to the human mind is unfalsifiable. Consequently, it cannot qualify as meaningful scientific knowledge. It can be safely thrown in the trash.

Yes. And if you guys had allowed him to continue, there wouldn't be now enough brazilians to elect his son.

The fact I can do this in Zig, bothers me. I understand it is all being resolved at comptime and I will get an error if foo resolves to C. But only in that case. Otherwise, obvious type violations on unreachable branches go unchecked. I suspect this is the result of lazy evaluation during the earlier stages of the compiler (probably during ZIR generation). But I would rather this wasn't something it allowed to pass. And it becomes much worse if I change the placeholder to `{any}`. Now, no compiler error will ever be generated.