realconor @ realconor @feddit.uk Posts 0Comments 10Joined 4 mo. ago
i would see it that way if the idea wasn't to follow up with pressure against those who do the worst, for this reason i see it more akin to ignoring a few people drowning to focus on the sinking cruise liner elsewhere
while i can see the position of wishing to go with the language that offers more fundamental forms of safety built into it, a browser is something that i feel must be performant in today's age of pitifully optimised web pages, to have a browser for these which inefficiently handles the processing of this i feel would be a major issue. of course, the fault here isn't of the browser developers but of the people making the pages, but they don't seem to show any signs of changing so for now we must deal with javascript-laden purgatory which can only really be alleviated slightly by having a browser handle it well.
secondly is that i feel the sheer quantity of C developers as opposed to the numbers of rust developers at present would suggest that the contributor pool for a C based project would be greater, though of course this is subject to change, and if it were to change so greatly then i could see it taking a path similar to linux wherein rust becomes interspersed into the project.
at present, i see no other exclusively rust browser being worked on that is in any reasonable state, though it would be good to have one for the sake of having varied options of course, if memory serves me right, the ladybird team got the gmail web client running on their browser, so things are coming along well by technical terms. in my view, this project is one deserving of support primarily due to simply not being affiliated with either chromium or firefox's codebases, one new player in the browser market is another success for end user choice, and should a rust-based browser come along itself, then that'd make two new players both all the welcome.
where else are they building these hundreds of thousands of houses except over the natural habitats of our already densely populated island? the solution is as easy as not letting the population skyrocket for the benefit of people wanting more numbers in the bank while we and our land bear the price of it
i can see the same thing, things that have been published for hours see steady activity, even some which are lively for a good few days, it feels less like flitting between a bunch of new things which is useful
grand, nobody needs to hear about your cause when they're trying to shop, they aren't all slaughterhouse proprietors (and most of them don't care about eating the same stuff humans have done for hundreds of thousands of years)
the reason they "are looking for eugenics fanclubs" are because they were ostricised when they were looking for "mildly conservative fanclubs"
the therapists that wouldn't hesitate to mouth off about everything you tell them to the authorities and have you involuntarily held? it's almost like they aren't your friend
their number one priority should be domestic manufacturing to benefit a greater degree of self-sustainence, though labour (and the rest of them in their big-number-in-the-bank driven greed) can't possibly side with this logic
i see no reason they should be banned, burning wood is nowhere near as contributive towards things such as pollution and lung issues as something like china's scale of manufacturing, i'm quite honestly sick of how over-mandated things are here when 99% of the problem isn't our cause, we could take the pressure somewhere where it's deserved instead
what's wrong with C? if it's causing issues that it's written in C, it's the developers whom are being entrusted with projects that are out of their depth in a project they shouldn't be responsible for at fault rather than the time-tested language