DRM has absolutely nothing do to with this.

Their existence is far more constant than heavily urbanized areas.

Certainly not. Moderately urbanized areas are a historical footnote. They came into existence less than a century ago, with the emergence of automobilism and cheap fuel.

Heavily urbanized areas have existed for millenia.

This is highly unrealistic. Most people do not want to be packed in tighter with other people, they want more space not less.

The alternative is that they stop existing altogether when personal automobiles become too expensive for the average consumer to own and operate.

I’m talking about moderately urbanized places (which there are a lot more of).

Such places exist as a direct consequence of car culture. Their existence is not a universal constant; they can and must be turned into heavily urbanized areas.

What kind of vehicle do you think usually pulls up to a loading dock?

Grocery stores inside cities do not have loading docks. Their goods are typically delivered by this type of vehicle to curb-side offloading sites during off-peak hours.

18 wheelers are not last mile delivery vehicles and have no business being in cities to begin with.

listening to the people your actions, or the actions you’re at the very least enabling, harm

What harm are you referring to?

Varför dömde HD så dåligt i frågan?

HD har inte dömt i frågan. Skolskjutsen nekades med hänvisning till en dom i HFD (inte HD) tidigare i år, men ingen rättstlig instans har tagit ställning i detta specifika ärende. Beslutet är överklagat till förvaltningsrätten.

Det framgår inte vilken dom som hänvisas. Det återstår att se om förvaltningsrätten håller med Laholms kommun i att domen ska tolkas på detta sätt.

Varför tillåts vägar som är så här pass osäkra att existera?

Vägen är bara osäker om folk envisas med att gå och cykla där. Om föräldrarna helt enkelt skjutsar barnen med bil är problemet löst en gång för alla.

What is a gif keyboard? What’s wrong with copy and pasting from ~/Pictures/memes/?

(Yes, I realize my old is showing)

Everything.

Every programming language is an abstraction layer between the programmer and the machine that will run the code. But abstraction isn’t free. Generally speaking, the higher the abstraction, the less efficient the program.

C++ optionally provides a much higher level of abstraction than pure C, which makes C++ much nicer to work with. But the trade off is that the program will struggle to run in resource constrained environments, where a program written in C would run just fine.

And to be clear, when I say “low-end hardware”, I’m not talking about the atom-based netbook from 2008 you picked up for $15 at a yard sale. It will run C++ based programs just fine. I’m talking about 8- or 16-bit microcontrollers running at <100 MHz with a couple of hundred kB of RAM. Such machines are still common in many embedded applications, and they do not handle C++ applications gracefully.

I mean yeah, if you restrict yourself to the C part of C++ it can do everything C can. But then you’re not getting any of the advantages of C++.

Once you start using things like classes and templates heavily, your program will quickly outgrow low-end hardware.

Comments like these are why I’m stoked about the climate apocalypse coming to wipe us all out.