My shower is theory is that there are infinite universes getting created all the time and we can never know about it because we're restricted in this universe. I love having these talks with my daughter.
That's almost the mainstream position in physics as of 2025 -- that cosmic inflation never stopped, that it produces universes beyond number, and we're in one pinched-off region of it.
The trouble would be that even if we sensed other universes we might not be able to go there unless we can create our own pocket universes. There's no guarantee that an adjacent universe has the same rules of physics.
All of the enzymes in your body might stop working if you stepped into even a slightly different universe. You could just turn into a gas, and not in a good way.
Have you considered any sort of templating like htm or JSX? Because it's a bit harder to read and I believe to work in a team it would be much simpler if there was a template syntax.
Yeah and it has no effect because its done by companies not countries. This is gonna continue for a long time. Its an incredible time to be a middle man
I thought a majority of Chinese businesses are state owned. Their neighbors understand the stakes though and have demonstrated eagerness to have low US tariff rates. I assume their customs agencies will be on the lookout for this relabeling strategy.
It's going to occur, as it already does occur, for all kinds of reasons, but it's not going to be as simple as you make it out to be. There is a limited capacity to perform this work meaning the costs may not even be competitive with the US tariff in the long run.
> I thought a majority of Chinese businesses are state owned.
Where'd you get that? The state has a significant (though usually less than controlling) ownership stake in about 1.5% of Chinese businesses, and at least _some_ ownership in about 2%.
"The state owns some of this" is, of course, not equivalent to "the state meaningfully controls this".
But in any case for this sort of activity you'd probably just establish new companies, which the state wouldn't have any share in anyway. And, also, this is kinda academic, because you wouldn't be doing it in China, you'd be doing it in some third country and transhipping goods originating in China.
I have never been to China, but you sound informed on the topic - maybe you can weight in on that.
I've heard from various YouTube channels covering news about China, it's social issues and shenanigans that all companies above a certain size are required to have someone on staff that's essentially part of the government. These channels are however mostly run by people speaking very good English, so clearly made for the western market.
But Googling that information seems to confirm it, too. I.e.
> Since 2018, domestically-listed companies are required to establish a party entity.
I cannot speak with confidence on the topic, but from an uninformed spectators perspective, it does sound like timewizards argument was correct?
> I thought a majority of Chinese businesses are state owned.
That’s not how things work, they care about control not micromanaging everything. There are rules favoring majority Chinese owned companies, but that doesn’t need to be government ownership.
The CCP only really cares about large companies or specific industries like media. There’s minimal interference in a food truck and thus most companies that are small, but things get more involved as you scale. Critical industries like shipping and electricity have government owned businesses running things.
Long term it will work. If foreign govt allow getting around tariffs, according to trump import deficit formula, tariff on the govt will go up. Usgov could also increase tariff on countries with more companies doing tariff shenanigans. The problem is with american 2 year election/midterm cycle no one believes that this will last more then 3-6 months now.
The original bug was returning STATUS_SUCCESS to indicate that a function had succeeded without noticing that STATUS_SUCCESS is defined as 0 in a function that's expected to return a non-zero value on success. This specific error could have happened on any language - defining two different return types and using the wrong one could happen in any language.
> defining two different return types and using the wrong one could happen in any language
This specifically is the kind of bug that is avoided with strong typing. The compiler screams at you when using the wrong return type. For example, if a callback expects a Result type, you must return a Result type, not some random int-like value whose definition of success and failure is arbitrary.
It can be avoided in any compiled language that has a boolean type. That includes C these days. Unfortunately this functionality predates the existence of the boolean type.
Yet they've had astounding success and is the most widely used operating system. Maybe usability and ease of access are far more important than beautiful design
Shockingly, monopolies and entrenchment in software is SUPER EFFECTIVE.
While MS isn't utterly technically bereft obviously, and they had some correct choices like backward compatibility and usability relative to imbeciles like IBM, just look at the botched execution of Win8, their security disasters, and generally superior products that got nudged out by beta-ware quality releases.
reply