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

In China, people generally share porn through closed social network groups.

Given what we know about China's internet, is there any real privacy in those groups if authorities wanted to crack down on them?

Well the sheer volume and high percetages of users that do it make it difficult. Despite what people try to pretend the Chinese government can't arbitrarily decree things without pushback and political fallout for it. You can't arrest all offenders if it means holding tens of millions people in detention. And trying to ban porn completely is going to piss off a massive percentage of their population, even if they don't say it directly.

encryption exists. so to an extent, yes there is privacy, but in the end, people are always the weak link.

Because Türkiye is a widely recognized sovereign state, while Taiwan (or more formally, the Republic of China) is not. Taiwan is also not a member of ISO.

> Because Türkiye is ....

All you are doing is re-enforcing my exact point that "because they asked nicely" is not the answer to the original question.


If you can build a bFLT version of BusyBox, then you can get a minimal system that can do some meaningful work! See BusyBox Linux[1].

[1]: https://github.com/chirsz-ever/busybox-linux



It's best to avoid using std::wstring and other wchar_t-related facilities, as they are highly non-portable across different platforms. If you need to interact with the Win32 API, use char16_t and std::u16string, so that anyone knows it contains a UTF-16 encoded string and knows how to use and process it.


The Windows API uses WCHAR = wchar_t, so if you use char16_t, you have to convert back and forth to avoid running afoul of strict aliasing rules. This imposes conversion costs without benefits; both using wchar_t directly or converting to/from UTF-8 are better.


Or, set up the manifest in your app[1], and just use UTF-8 and `std::string`/`std::string_view` everywhere.

[1]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/apps/design/global...


You can see:

* no-panic: https://docs.rs/no-panic/latest/no_panic/

* Safe Rust has no undefined behavior: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39564755


would be great to have no alloc too as op requested.


In ancient China, the imperial year designations were usually changed in the second year following the coronation of a new emperor, thus preventing the occurrence of two imperial year designations in the same year. Japan seems to have chosen to change the imperial year designation in the same year because of the faster flow of information in modern times. I still think it would be more convenient to change it the second year.


Japan has been using their unique system for over 1000 years. It's not a recent change. They never really cared for the Confucian standards of Chinese emperors. (If they did, they wouldn't have called their own monarch an emperor!)

I say Confucian standards, because the Chinese rule of changing the imperial year designation in the second year of a new emperor seems to have been more about propriety and respect for the late emperor than it was about convenience. A number of emperors actually changed the year designation immediately upon ascending to the throne, which was seen as an attempt to discredit their predecessor.


I've recently been doing something similar: I have a UbiSurfer 9, a netbook using an S3C2416 chip as its CPU, running the ARMv5 instruction set, and with 128MB of DDR2 memory. Its original operating system is WinCE 6.0, and I'm trying to run Linux on it. The good news is that Debian still maintains the armel architecture, so we potentially have a large number of userspace programs available. The bad news is there's no suitable kernel and bootloader. Fortunately, a friend helped me write a bootloader and modified the kernel source code to make it work. Running a Debian system is possible, but quite slow, so I created a minimal system with only Busybox[1], and it works perfectly.

[1]: https://github.com/chirsz-ever/busybox-linux

I'm still exploring this; related information is in this repository, written in Chinese:

https://github.com/chirsz-ever/ubisurfer9


The behavior of C macros is actually described by a piece of pseudocode from Dave Prosser and it is not in the standard:

* https://www.spinellis.gr/blog/20060626/

* https://www.spinellis.gr/pubs/jrnl/2006-DDJ-Finessing/html/S...

* https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-prs/2001-q1/msg00495.html


This is the best explanation I've seen so far:

https://marc.info/?l=boost&m=118835769257658&w=2


This needs to be framed somewhere, very lucid explanation


Wow, I'm not sure I've ever seen this (or if I did, it was 20 years ago).

And I was definitely looking around for this kind of history when I was searching around when writing. Perhaps my google skills have decayed... or google... or both!

Thanks very much.


Oh, are you L33 T.?


If my google fu is that bad, it's pretty much impossible to be.


Oh, I understood you to be saying you'd written this article.


Honestly, it feels like something like this should have been put in the standard instead of all the English prose that ended in the section about the preprocessor expansion. Yeah, it's not pretty, but at least it requires way less skill in hermeneutics to understand correctly.


Thank you very much for providing these links!


Demonstration video on a EL display terminal from the 1980s: https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1cU4y1A7ud


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

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

Search: