If anything i18n makes things way worse for everyone. Ever tried to diagnose a semi-obscure Windows or Android error on a non-English locale? Pretty sure that's one of the activities in the inner circles of Hell. Bonus points if the error message is obviously machine-translated and therefore semantically meaningless.
Unique error codes fix this if they remain visible to the user, which they usually don't because Mr Project Manager thinks it looks untidy.
I mean, he's actively supporting the opposition (Trump) right now. Were Trump to win then he'd certainly be in a very good position within Trump's desired oligarchy. Until then he's just a very rich asshole whose main major concrete political power comes from his ownership of Twitter and (largely artificial) audience. If anything his support of Trump kneecaps him in his ability to run his businesses as the Biden and hypothetical Harris administrations are not as likely to let him keep getting away with all the blatantly illegal shit he keeps doing.
Michael Bloomberg OTOH fits the term pretty well, as he's a very major donor to the DNC and that certainly makes him very close to the ear of the president and policy decisions.
Without good and realistic answers to how the long-term maintenance of such changes would be managed, it is myopically unrealistic to propose those changes
Lina is talking about a minor change though. It challenges the dominant paradigm but her opinion seems to be that it doesn't have negative impact on the overall maintainability. To shift the discussion to maintainability is whataboutism; if these kernels maintainers can't accept patches that do not have a negative impact on maintainability or directly involve Rust in any way because they are related to Rust in general, that's disappointing tribalism regardless of your opinions on Rust or Rust developers.
I might be missing some context here as I'm only going off what Lina has said, but if half of it is true then we need to shift attitudes before talking about how to integrate Rust in the kernel ecosystem. It certainly feels very disingenuous and retrograde to present Rust as some kind of existential threat rather than a novelty or opportunity, as if no combination of processes and tools could ever possibly overcome the stated maintainability challenges.
The vibes I got in the other thread about Wedson's announcement is that the concerns may be valid but there are indeed a handful of contributors who are aggressively shouting down Rust contributor's efforts to set up the processes you outlined based on hard prejudice. The video Wedson posted was hard to watch. From the outside looking in it looks to be way more about ego than any particular technical roadblock.
Furthermore Lina's concerns here are only broader what you are saying:
When I wrote the DRM scheduler abstractions, I ran into many memory safety issues caused by bad design of the underlying C code. The lifetime requirements were undocumented and boiled down to "design your driver like amdgpu to make it work, or else".
My driver is not like amdgpu, it fundamentally can't work the same way. When I tried to upstream minor fixes to the C code to make the behavior more robust and the lifetime requirements sensible, the maintainer blocked it and said I should just do "what other drivers do".
Mainlining memory safety improvements, in C, for C code should be welcomed and it is very concerning if she indeed got shunned because the end goal was to offer lifetime guarantees (which to my admittedly non-expert eye sounds like it would be a good thing for memory safety in general).
The concern from those contributors (and we might soon see the same in QEMU) is that these bindings are essentially a weaponization which forces the great majority of contributors to learn Rust or drop out. Essentially a hostile takeover.
Seems like a moral panic over absolutely nothing (where are the Rust developers allegedly forcing people to learn Rust? all I've seen in these threads today is Rust developers asking for an open mind and a willingness to collaborate), and that the response to this "concern" is to block any and all changes that might benefit Rust adoption is really concerning (but unfortunately not unsurprising) behavior.
Israel dropping unguided bombs from 10k feet from prop airplanes is certainly an "entertaining" thought but so far removed from the reality of precision guided missiles hitting hospitals and snipers shooting unarmed civilians and journalists in the back that it loops back around to being funny in a very morbid way.
Yuuuuuuup.
"How much will option A cost? Dunno."
"What about option B? Dunno."
"My gut tells me B is much more expensive than A though." "Yeah for sure. But I prefer B."
Wanna waste a hundred grand a year? Go right ahead, who cares. Wanna hire someone? Woah hold your horses there bucko, don't you know we have budget limitations??
And if you think that's a weird hangup from the past, remember that Americans, including very educated ones, are still currently mad (like, actually mad) that Pluto got demoted to Dwarf Planet. Because it's the only "planet" discovered by Americans.
Pluto can be a planet if you want but then so are Ceres, Eris, Gonggong, and the several other dwarf planets, else your argument stands on nothing more than naked chauvinism. Which is usually how it goes.
By contrast I never personally heard anyone in the francosphere seriously complain about Pluto's status, nevermind keep including it in the list of planets as an act of defiance. Because who cares (the Americans, that's who).
That conspiracy theory is so dumb.
The government almost certainly doesn't need a backdoor as telegram is almost completely unencrypted (only one-to-one channels can be but aren't by default). The real (but more boring) conspiracy theory is that governments generally don't mind Telegram because its willfully terrible security model allows them to keep an eye on terrorists and activists' communications (I have a hard time believing that the NSA or even DGSE don't have their own backdoors already).
However the EU does have laws mandating the moderation of said unencrypted messages, especially when it comes to CSAM, which Telegram is notoriously poorly moderated. It's certainly reason enough to arrest and question this guy, at least until formal charges are brought or he walks free. Maybe there are additional political considerations, but there doesn't have to be.
Also how would arresting this guy help with backdooring. He doesn't have access to the source code. Whoever he calls to get that done is out of reach of the French police. He has no reason not to disable that backdoor as soon as he gets out of the EU. If he can be bought off he already has been (Crypto AG style except way lamer because no-one clever&important trusts Telegram), you don't need to arrest someone to pay them. I'm no DSGSE bigwig but pressuring lower level engineers to backdoor their code seems like a 1000% more effective approach.
We need an app that keeps the gender ratios even.
Isn't that what Tinder is indirectly trying to achieve with its "Get Super Gold+++ insta premium" business model? To get a somewhat even gender ratio you need to get a bunch of men to drop out, and asking for absurd amounts of money is certainly one way to go about it. Though I hear even premium tinder users vastly outnumber the women.
A raffle could work in theory, but upwards of 80 % of men will have to be thrown out and as a woman I wouldn't see why I would settle for that instead of an app where attractive men will be falling over themselves to talk to me.
AFAIK the only proven methods for not-super-attractive men to get matches is to either go offline, or be bi/gay. Do with that advice what you will.
Fascists don't win on facts and logic, they win on affect.
He says one thing about guns, but means something about hurting minorities. His electorate only cares about the second part. Literally anything you could argue about the first part is worse than useless, because through sheer power of denial they'll revert to affect on this well-practiced talking point (”Trump love guns, Trump hate [insert slur here], Trump just like me"). You can't win on this battlefield, no matter how objectively and obviously right you are.
That's why "Trump is weird" is so unbelievably more effective than "Trump is a rapist", "Trump is a fascist", "Trump is a criminal" or "Trump is a traitor". Pointing out his weirdness directly undermines his affect. "We're not going back" calls back to the constant feeling of dread of his presidency. Ironically when dealing with humans, but especially when dealing with fascists, affect and core values are more important and less malleable than facts.
[citation needed]
Good news: where I live we don't build our houses out of paper and spit and I'd find it very entertaining to see a critter eat through a solid 40 cm of bricks and mortar.
Bad news: Where I live there are no porcupines :(