Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 112
- 2
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Funny, for me it is the opposite. I use Linux for work, (plus for some pleasure like posting here, some light gaming) and Win for pleasure (gaming only).
Personally, I would not use NTFS outside of windows much. Storage is cheap enough that getting a separate partition or even disk per OS seems preferable. In any case, you want some backup strategy. Some people will use a NTFS partition to share data between the operating systems (as linux support for ntfs is better than windows support for ext).
With regard to rust (which I have yet to learn), my understanding is that it is that the aim of the language is to provide an environment which can be as safe as Java with no runtime overhead over C, with a particular focus on thread safety. This means that you have to bother a lot annotating the lifetime of a reference in places where C/C++ would just be 'whatever, enjoy your nasal demons if you get it wrong and do a use-after-free'.
Of course, not every piece of code which is safe can be proven to a compiler to be safe. Rice's theorem and all that. Or it might be that you need to call some C function or do I/O using a device mapped to memory. Thus unsafe.
I think that from the mindset of an auditor looking for security vulnerabilities, there is still a giant difference between C and rust. In C, every line is potentially dangerous, and you need to spread your attention wide. By contrast, unsafe blocks stick out. Now, it might be that the author decided to put everything in unsafe blocks or equivalently have a function to write to arbitrary memory addresses which he calls in a zillion places, but then you can just report that that code is generally unsafe. If there are just a few unsafe blocks, you can think long and hard about when these blocks are entered, why they might be correct and so on.
More options
Context Copy link