On 06/14/2018 02:34 AM, errExit wrote:
> 
> The D Foundation now subjects all users having an ip originating from a tor exit node, to having their posts moderated (but by whom, when, how, criteria ?? etc).
> 
> Literally millions of people could, and probably would, be using that exit node.
> 
> So that is plain discrimination. It's not spammer management.
> 
> Forcing people to identify themselves, is also not about spammer management either.
> 
> The D Foundation IS now discimantory against those that want that believe that freedom and privacy is some to be protected.
> 
> This becomes problematic for those of us who work in 'certain organisations', that insist on tracking it's employees online activities (even outside of the workplace).
> 
> It's a shame the D Foundation has finally succumed to the big brother mentality - under the guise of protecting you from spam.
> 
> https://blog.torproject.org/dont-let-facebook-or-any-tracker-follow-you-web
> 

I'm with you on a lot of that, however, this part troubles me:

"This becomes problematic for those of us who work in 'certain organisations', that insist on tracking it's employees online activities (even outside of the workplace)."

If I worked in such an organization that tracked its employees activities *outside the workplace*, I'd LEAVE it ASAP, and I'd strongly suggest anyone else do the same. I mean what insane workplace is that, the 1920's mob? Apple?

Honestly, if you believe strongly enough in Tor to use it, why in the world would you willfully aid and abed an organization that does that sort of thing? It doesn't make any sense at all. It's EXTREMELY self-contradictory and completely erodes your entire stance. If you're going to preach for personal freedom and privacy, at least have the basic integrity to LIVE the basic ideals you're preaching even when doing so ISN'T so trivial as installing a mere web browser.

On Thursday, 14 June 2018 at 02:32:51 UTC, errExit wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 June 2018 at 17:04:11 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>>
>> I am part of the D community. I haven't discriminated against anyone. I don't know what a Tor user is.
>>
>> I've just searched: So Tor is an old idea of mine, implemented. :o)
>>
>> Ali
>
> Tor is our last line of defence against an Orson Wells future, where everyones actions are scrutinized by big brother, so that big brother can use that knowledge to put fear into, control and manipulate, those that don't conform.
>
> assert("bad tor user" != "all tor users are bad");
>
> (actually there are more bad non-tor users)
>
> Unfortunately, it's becoming increasingly, the norm, to discriminate against tor users (no doubt those doing that discrimination are those that are happy to conform, of which there will be many, sadly).
>
> https://people.torproject.org/~lunar/20160331-CloudFlare_Fact_Sheet.pdf

Tor is merely one tool used to route around those building centralized systems on top of the internet. The real solution is that as more and more decentralized tech does well, like git or cryptocurrencies, to get rid of these obsolete centralized systems altogether.

On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 14:34:28 Uknown via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> Looks very promising. One question though, why not use std.datetime.stopwatch.benchmark? I think it has some protection against optimizing compilers (I may be wrong though). Also, LDC has attributes to control optimizations on a per function basis.see : https://wiki.dlang.org/LDC-specific_language_changes

Unfortunately, std.datetime.stopwatch.benchmark does not yet have such protections. It has been discussed, but there were issues with it that still need to be sorted out.

In any case, what he has implemented is pretty much what's in Phobos except for the fact that he set up his to take arguments, whereas Phobos' solution just takes the function(s) to call, so anything that it does has to be self-contained.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Thursday, 14 June 2018 at 07:19:31 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
>
> I'm with you on a lot of that, however, this part troubles me:
>
> "This becomes problematic for those of us who work in 'certain organisations', that insist on tracking it's employees online activities (even outside of the workplace)."
>
> If I worked in such an organization that tracked its employees activities *outside the workplace*, I'd LEAVE it ASAP, and I'd strongly suggest anyone else do the same. I mean what insane workplace is that, the 1920's mob? Apple?
>
> Honestly, if you believe strongly enough in Tor to use it, why in the world would you willfully aid and abed an organization that does that sort of thing? It doesn't make any sense at all. It's EXTREMELY self-contradictory and completely erodes your entire stance. If you're going to preach for personal freedom and privacy, at least have the basic integrity to LIVE the basic ideals you're preaching even when doing so ISN'T so trivial as installing a mere web browser.

sorry. but what world do you live in?

If all such people stopped working for such companies, what do you think the economic impact would be?

Tor prevents tracking, and therefore it is not contradictory to work for such companies - because they can't track you (or at least, it become much more difficult to do so).

On Wednesday, 13 June 2018 at 06:46:43 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
> I had a little fun today kicking the crap out of C's memcpy with a D implementation.
>
> https://github.com/JinShil/memcpyD
>
> Request for help: I don't have a Linux system running on real hardware at this time, nor do I have a wide range of platforms and machines to test with.  If you'd like to help me with this potentially foolish endeavor, please run the program on your hardware and send me the results.
>
> Feedback, advise, and pull requests to improve the implementation are most welcome.
>
> Mike

Hello Mike,

These are my results:

Ubuntu 16.04.4 amd64 Linux 4.16.0-ck1+
Intel Xeon E5-2620 0 @ 2.00GHz - 12 cores
32 GB RAM

dmd -O -release memcpyd.d # dmd 2.080.0

size memcpyC memcpyD
1 125349 47658
2 155014 50492
4 173099 52669
8 228236 52676
16 107897 32621
32 128039 32604
64 163644 37658
128 223840 50420
256 338769 90300
512 584772 171038
1024 878093 995813
2048 1346958 1254141
4096 2439378 2101284
8192 5631202 3554307
16384 9873090 6496635
32768 22489302 21328288
65536 50522961 45748356

size memcpyC memcpyD
1 123241 27631
1 130758 28165
1 123247 32748
2 142964 27587
2 140914 28103
4 168084 32616
4 171166 27590
8 228274 27604
8 233249 27605
4 168624 27597
8 238049 29435
16 103956 52730

ldc2 -O3 -release memcpyd.d # ldc2 1.10.0-beta1

(I think these are strange results)

size memcpyC memcpyD
1 0 0
2 0 0
4 0 0
8 0 0
16 559 0
32 1003 0
64 0 0
128 0 0
256 0 0
512 0 0
1024 460182 1519048
2048 739148 1973641
4096 1533047 3168472
8192 2913463 5560106
16384 6385370 10353178
32768 20889322 21487968
65536 44920382 48339716

size memcpyC memcpyD
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
2 0 0
2 0 0
4 0 0
4 0 0
8 0 0
8 0 0
4 0 0
8 0 0
16 0 0

On 6/13/18 10:32 PM, errExit wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 June 2018 at 17:04:11 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>>
>> I am part of the D community. I haven't discriminated against anyone. I don't know what a Tor user is.
>>
>> I've just searched: So Tor is an old idea of mine, implemented. :o)
>>
>> Ali
> 
> Tor is our last line of defence against an Orson Wells future, where everyones actions are scrutinized by big brother, so that big brother can use that knowledge to put fear into, control and manipulate, those that don't conform.

Sorry KingJoffrey/psychoticRabbit/etc, you literally only started using Tor when your steady IP was banned. This argument kind of falls down when your past behavior is examined.

It's really the impersonation that is the problem, not the anonymity. If you just would stick to one persona, and especially not impersonate people who actually post on this forum, you would not have to use Tor at all, and the forum moderators wouldn't have to worry about active moderation.

-Steve

On 15/06/2018 1:22 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> It's really the impersonation that is the problem, not the anonymity. If you just would stick to one persona, and especially not impersonate people who actually post on this forum, you would not have to use Tor at all, and the forum moderators wouldn't have to worry about active moderation.

Not quite. It was the attacking of the D community at large which convinced those with the power to actively ban, to ban "him".

We have in essence decided that this person will never be willing to have positive experiences within our community and have out right decided that we do not want them here under any circumstance.

A lot of work has gone into getting rid of "him". As far as I am concerned the original IP address that was used from Australia was in fact a proxy and had the single desire for this person, was to attack us.

Once they are gone, we can deactivate the extra protections that have been put in place, because until this person came along, we were quite happy moderating ourselves. It lasted nearly 20 years that peace...

On 6/14/18 9:31 AM, rikki cattermole wrote:
> On 15/06/2018 1:22 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> It's really the impersonation that is the problem, not the anonymity. If you just would stick to one persona, and especially not impersonate people who actually post on this forum, you would not have to use Tor at all, and the forum moderators wouldn't have to worry about active moderation.
> 
> Not quite. It was the attacking of the D community at large which convinced those with the power to actively ban, to ban "him".

Well, for me, it wasn't attacks. There have been quite a few people in this community who were rude, insulting, and IMO, that is not worth moderation. In fact some of them have even came around and become quite good D contributors. Those problems usually work themselves out because we have a great community which does not give trolls the attention they desire.

But when you start impersonating people, especially ones that post to this forum, you have crossed the line and are literally putting words into other's mouths. We've seen this before, and generally they go away, but this guy does not want to.

Now he's claiming "discrimination" ;)

> Once they are gone, we can deactivate the extra protections that have been put in place, because until this person came along, we were quite happy moderating ourselves. It lasted nearly 20 years that peace...

I agree, this will be a blip in our forum experience, and next month we'll barely remember him.

-Steve

On Thursday, 14 June 2018 at 07:54:20 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 14:34:28 Uknown via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>> Looks very promising. One question though, why not use std.datetime.stopwatch.benchmark? I think it has some protection against optimizing compilers (I may be wrong though). Also, LDC has attributes to control optimizations on a per function basis.see : https://wiki.dlang.org/LDC-specific_language_changes
>
> Unfortunately, std.datetime.stopwatch.benchmark does not yet have such protections. It has been discussed, but there were issues with it that still need to be sorted out.
>
> In any case, what he has implemented is pretty much what's in Phobos except for the fact that he set up his to take arguments, whereas Phobos' solution just takes the function(s) to call, so anything that it does has to be self-contained.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

huh. I saw the PR and assumed it was accepted. Anyway, for DMD putting `asm` blocks seems to still disable optimizations, and for LDC, the pragma is perfect. GDC is the only unknown.

On Thursday, 14 June 2018 at 13:42:14 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

> Well, for me, it wasn't attacks. There have been quite a few people in this community who were rude, insulting, and IMO, that is not worth moderation. In fact some of them have even came around and become quite good D contributors. Those problems usually work themselves out because we have a great community which does not give trolls the attention they desire.

That seems to be the opinion of most. The problem I have is that this forum is the main way to communicate about the language, and thus it is how others form their opinion of the language.