Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | pasc1878's commentslogin

See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg1mzlryxeo

Note that IWF is not a random charity it works with the Police on these matters.

I found this as the first item in Kagi search - perhaps you should try non AI searches


And when the magazines get sold who is breaking the law and gets convicted it is not the children but the shop supplying the children.

So when Grok provides the illegal pictures then by the same logic it is Grok that is breaking the law.


Xcode is really only usable for Objective-C, C and Swift its support for C++ e.g. simple things like formatting and definitions and debugging for C++ are as you note are just poor

Visual Studio does treat C++ as a first class language (I suspect because that was the first non C language it supported and Windows apps used C++ in the 1990s)

I would try Clion for C++ if you can't use VS. Eclipse was reasonable 15 years ago when Apple used gcc.


Experiments on how to make tea (well does milk go in before or after) is the original exposition of statistical testing of the null hypothesis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_tasting_tea


I usually see articles saying that Java checked exceptions are bad.

e.g. https://www.javacodegeeks.com/2026/01/javas-checked-exceptio...


It really depends on how reliable you want the code to be. Many business application developers prioritize development speed and don't want to think about errors, for them checked exceptions may seem like a hassle. For developers who prioritize reliability unchecked exceptions are a huge problem because they are not part of the contract and can change without notice.

Because java is garbage-collected and doesn't have any of the problems of C++ exceptions, so checked exceptions just become a nuisance of having to try/catch everything.

You don't have to try/catch everything.

You do have to catch checked exceptions and that is the issue under debate.

No, you can just declare that the exception in the throws clause.

Although having lost their cheif desihner recently there is a chnace thet they might improve and go back to the standards of 10 years ago.


Also see weathergraph that does similar graph and shows the temps etc in a downwards colum,n as well


Good so the car won't be killing people due to high noxious emissions.


Stick a petrol version of the engine in (Peugeot XU instead of XUD) and convert it to run on propane. There you go, now the exhaust is just water and carbon dioxide, and you don't die from breathing it in. No CO, no HC, and not really any more NOx that was in the air it sucked in.

This is why forklifts run on gas, instead of petrol or diesel.

We could have had incredibly clean air in our cities 25 years ago, if the government hadn't decided that pushing "scrappage schemes" to get people to buy "cleaner greener diesels" was cheaper.


Yes Dark Sky had the best UI of any weather app I have used.

I now use Weathergraph which does it differently but I would go back to Dark Sky (and pay for it) in a flash.

It shows the correct things and on a phone understands that showing the temperatures across the screen is useless as if I go out I want to know what the weather is like when I might make the journey back in 8+ hours time. I might not care what the weather is in 4 hours time as I will be inside.


The point here is you worked tech support so you were paid to answer user questions.

However the answerers on So are not paid. Why should tyhy waste their time on a user who has not shown they have put any effort in and asks a question that they have already answered several times before?


Nobody, least of all me, is saying people should work for free. But not being paid to do something you don't want to do is a reason to go do something else, not hang around and be a hostile, superior dick about it, alienating the users.


The answerers are just as much users as the questioners - possibly in fact more as they are the ones spending time whilst the askers often (especially the poor ones) just ask a question and then go away.

Unfortunately the SO management want money and so want the fly away askers more than the answerers who provide the benefit of the site.


> However the answerers on So are not paid. Why should tyhy waste their time on a user who has not shown they have put any effort in and asks a question that they have already answered several times before?

This is kind of a weird sentiment to put forth, because other sites namely Quora actually do pay their Answerer's. An acquintance of mine was at one time a top "Question Answerer" on Quora and got some kind of compensation for their work.

So this is not the Question-Asker's problem. This is the problem of Stack Overflow and the people answering the questions.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: