And no one said any of that. In the world today, the current EUV machines are made by one company in the world. It is ASML in the Netherlands. The US nor Japan produces them, and both countries have a long history with making lithography machines. The problem was the cost of R&D and the specific strategies to make EUV was successful only for one company. Making EUV machines is not an easy task that someone can do in their garage this weekend.

Can China copy everything ASML did? Sure. The issue is that it will take them a while to do so as part of the difficulty with EUV is that only very specific companies make the parts as EUV is on the cutting edge of technology. And as long as China is willing to spend huge amounts of money so that their machines are never profitable, they can do that.

The issue is you have taken China's word they have actually accomplished what they said they did. Personally, I don't believe them until I have seen it. For example, China proclaimed a breakthrough when SMIC made the Kirin 9000 processor for the Huawei Mate 60 Pro in 2023. The chip was a 7nm chip which all the "naysayers" said China could never manufacture. Except it was made using DUV not EUV. No one ever said 7nm was not possible using DUV. The main reason EUV was used was the smaller size meant low yields as not to be profitable and practical if DUV was used.

So the claim that China has made 7nm chips was technically true.

They aren't clones, they are just the optimal shape. The USSR's Buran had similar claims made against it, but it was very different to the Shuttle. No main engines, larger, different mission profile, and much faster turn-around times. It's just that the best shape for a spaceplane is the shape that the Shuttle is, so every other one looks like a "clone" of it.

It's worse with China for some reason. I was reading today that they have apparently been testing a new far UV lithography machine that was "reverse engineered"... By simply hiring people who worked on the ASML one. That's a new definition of reverse engineering to me.

China might go for the poles. Maybe depends how the US gets on, if they think they can get there first with an easier mission. They have landed a robotic probe there already, so have some experience that the US lacks, but it's a more difficult landing.

At which point, you're (basically) using C - again.

No, C++.

Rust like C++ has a powerful type system which you can use to enforce a whole bunch of stuff, automate away error prone, repetitive code and so on and so forth.

C and C++ are not the same language. Compared to C, Rust also gives you a ton of useful language stuff that's been developed in the last 60 years or so. This means not writing by hand tons and tons and tons of code you can get the compiler to write for you. That's less code to debug which means fewer bugs.

It also gives you better expressiveness to model the domain in the type system which again leads to shorter, less buggy code which is also more obvious.

Compared to C++: you don't generally IIUC wrap all rust code in unsafe blocks, which means the majority of the code has been verified free of some types of error which are very easy to make in C and moderately easy to make in C++. If you write all your code as unsafe and make use of that by bashing away at pointers, yeah there's not a significant difference (to C++, but still a bi improvement over C). But why would you do that?

Let's be honest, it's an ideological dick measuring contest. If capitalism doesn't get there first, people might get the wrong idea.

NASA won't go for the poles. It will be boots on the ground ASAP, nothing fancy.

At the moment it's looking 50/50 who gets there first.

I wasn't going to watch it anyway, but Gervais would ensure I actively avoid it. He's never been funny, just cringe. He's no Steve Coogan.

Same with Japanese due, with the additional problem that often you need to context to do a sensible translation. Often things like newspaper headlines come out as "I did such and such" because the lack of context means that the software can't tell it's not someone relating their own experience.

A universal translator is basically impossible.

It has a SINGLE pair of boards, duh.

You said fuck it and voted for the reality show host with bankrupt casinos.

With bankrupt casinos AND dementia.

You can tell people are rationalizing of course, because basically all of the arguments against Biden also applied to Trump but not Harris. But someone when Biden withdrew, Harris's laugh was a more important issue on the national level than the President having serious cognitive decline.

And for what, so you yo-yos can get money for nothing and your chicks for free?

I've got a daytime job and I'm doing alright.

How nice for you and the other guy.

We were both fans. But allegedly it had a low number of tens of millions of users, but then firefox has a decent number of tens, so the percentages weren't terrible.

It's a collecting information about your activity service. It's not for you, it's for them.

yeah yeah if you're not paying you're the product yada yada.

Cool. But it was also useful to me. The bookmarking and tagging was very useful. The recommended articles were really good. And I shouldn't use it because?

They haven't got any other ideas to reverse the falling user numbers, and apparently neither does anyone else. Firefox is a decent browser, with some of the best privacy protection features. The Android version needs some work, but it's better than Chrome. HDR doesn't work, but how many people care?

So why do people abandon it? Some sites don't work, but without simply becoming a Chrome skin they can't do a huge amount about that.

Aggressive marketing by Google? Can't stop that either.

AI isn't actually the worst idea. For a lot of people being able to say "download this video" and it does would be a valuable feature. You can do it with an add on, but most people won't get that far. I bet it won't be able to do that though.

Employers need to accept that they have to train and develop people they take on. Grades should be an indication of ability to learn.