Something Stinks In Rust

 There, a title that is a refrance to Big Willy Shakespeare--relationship to Britney "BitchForEmphasis" Spears is one I'll just assume for reasons of funny

 Now that I have a title that is a refrance to Billy Willy Shake, as nobody calls him, clearly this blog post can be viewed as highly intelligent and well thought out and thus excessively correct

Rust Is Looking Low-Key Suss and Sketch

 "Look, I get that killing my Uncle because a ghost told me to do that is a very terrible idea. This is why I've came up with this play, in which I will determine my guilt via examining their body language similar to several TikTok accounts (not yet invented)" -- Hamlet, William "Big Willy Shakes" Shakespeare, Heavily Paraphrased To Meaninglessness

So, I made a statement in the past (somewhere) that I would look more into Rust once it was more established. As at the time, it was still very much in an Alpha state, with major functions/features either missing or changing based upon what version of the compiler was being used

Now, we are at the point that the compiler is not a "used wrong version error" stage of its development. So a better picture of what is going on with Rust can be seen

It looks like it is being used by Microsoft in an effort to do its Divide&Conquer on GNU/Linux and the FlOSS world 

With most of the people championing it, being "UnwittingPawns" for something that appears to be Microsoft attempting a XanatosGambit

I will still look into actually learning the language, mostly because I understand it will be important from a Historical Perspective(TM)(C)(R). However, there is enough stuff around the whole Rust-lang thing, that has me kind of side-eyeing the whole thing heavily

Yes, people into Rust will promote its type-safe language as a philosophy approach. As that is the one good  thing with Rust... but so much stuff around it... kind of shows that there is a reason why they focus on that ONE selling point

Nothing actually major, but a lot of small and medium things are showing up, that have the focus on its one good selling point just made even less helpful. No actual Red Flags... but a plethora of Yellow Flags

Rust's Legacy Will Likely Be In the Many Non-Rust Things that Exist Because of Rust

 "Okay, so it is very important that people are at the least not trustworthy towards compliments. Better if they openly disbelieve them. This is why we deploy things like How to Make Friends and Influence People into general usage. More importantly is the concept of the Feces Sandwich. Which turns out, you can base it on the KFC Double Down, with the Feces being the bread, and the compliment being the filling. This way, nobody will ever believe a compliment ever again"  -- Johnathan Wernstrum, Business Blogs for Success

 So, up until recently, my main thoughts on Rust was that it would be considered historically similar as Simula or SmallTalk. In that both those languages are big deals, mostly in how they influenced how other languages worked and operated. With their functionality being heavily incorporated into how other stuff did things

 Maybe even on par with Forth or CHIP8 for their relevance to later technological workings and stuff. Not likely to have a similar effect as Befunged and later Fungoids--but that comparison would need to be addressed for the inaccuracies it would hold

In the case of Rust-lang, the most obvious way it seemed like it would influence later computer development is the functionality of the Linker System they were working on. In order to replace the standard C-style dynamic library linker systems, with one that is more memory/type safe for the stuff being linked

When making systems that interact with C-style dynamic libraries in languages that are not C (even ones that are C-style) there is an irritatingly large amount of broiler-plate code that would be nice if the linker system itself took better care of dealing with. That being said, nobody has actually put together a decent solution for how to accomplish this

The nature of Rust-lang, and its requirements to do things that C does, in order to convince people that it can be used where they'd usually use C, kind of requires coming up with a Type/Memory Safe Dynamic Library Linking system

That--and the current state where Rust requires Static Linking for all the stuff developed for Rust

There is a non-zero chance that if Rust-Community figures such a system out, such a system would, inevitably, outlive Rust-Lang itself. Which, seems like it might be something that has been used as an argument against working on the Rust-Style Dynamic Linker (sub)system

 The Type/Memory Safe Orientated style of coding _also_ seems like it is something that will outlive Rust-lang as a thing. Yes, there are languages that have incorporated this as part of their design. With the SML/ML based ones having it as part of their language as a side effect of their Functional Design--as oppose to it being a main design feature of said language. With various SML/ML family languages having a large amount of stuff to work around the type/memory safe stuff, as it turns out Computer Maths is quite a bit different than every other family of Maths out there. Even when Computer Maths is being restrained to the style of other Maths out there, via being in the SML/ML family tree

Now, you _CAN_ do this sort of stuff in C Code. Sure, the main system of doing it, right now, is via a bunch of broiler-plate code, that it is entirely possible for people to evade, disable or ignore. Often enabled with hardware like an MMU chip in the chipset

Heck, one of the main lessons learned in designing MMU frameworks/systems, is that an MMU can either be _REALLY_ helpful to a system functioning and being useful. Or the MMU can be detrimental to getting anything done, and needs to be disabled in order to get the system to be usable. It determines on the design and implementation of the MMU and how one interacts with it

Though, hardware itself is not required to get C Code to do this stuff. You could literally get C Code to do it via the usage of another Preparser step. C Code is already not directly compiled. Instead you run over the C Code with a Preparser once, compile that--and then load the result into a linker. In some cases, the compiler has another step, where the C Code is turned into Assembler, and then Assembled, while/before being linked

It should also be noted that once the code is Compiled into a Binary, it is no longer Type-Safe, and can have a disassembler or C-Decompiler applied onto the Binary. With the Binary not being something that cannot be targeted by Binary-Patches onto the code. The point of Rust Lang is not the output--but the things the language requires its users to do, in order to have the Rust Lang act as a very nosey Beyond PEP-8 style Lint, as part of the compile process

This functionality could be accomplished by having a similar Lint turned up to 11 (out of a total possible 5) be included in the toolchains of a C-Compiler, as a form of Preprocessor. To add more of the syntactical clues to the Internal Rust Lint type stuff when programming in C

It should be noted that Objective-C started off as just being a `moc` preprocessor/preparser step that outputted C code. Even before Objective-C included a Virtual Machine setup to handle its Memory Management Functionality. Heck, the Objective-C preprocessor/preparser kind of continued to exist well past that stage of Objective-C--even to the point that some earlier interactions with NextStep involved this sort of "C Code with Added Flair" for how it was programmed. Which actually, somewhat, confused some prospective NextStep developers

The QT/KDE libraries on UNIX/Workalike systems, also, in many different major versions, include an additional preprocessor/preparser to allow for its handling of signals/communications between different parts of programs (on top of so many other features). Stuff that you could code into your project without using said preprocessor/preparser with just a bit of broilerplate code, and syntactical hideousness on new levels

It is not outside of programming in C/C++ for another preprocessor/preparser to be added into the C or C/C++ toolchain, that effectively adds the functionality that Rust is using as a selling point into standard C and C/C++ codebases. It just requires somebody make it--and gets people to actually use it

Which Rust kind of relies on its "looking really shiny and new" to get people to actually be interested in it. Usually new programmers who lack the knowledge base to be aware that "you can just do that in C"

First Big Stinky With Rust: Its What Kewl Kids Are Into

 "Okay, but all the cool kids are smoking. Do you want to be completely uncool, and not smoke? Peer Pressure, man. Peer Pressure!" -- Old Smoking Ads, and the Rust Community (apparently)

So, now that we got the big benefits of Rust, that people will move back to--let's go into some of the Yellow Flags this whole thing with Rust is doing

The biggest one is the constant cry of "How do you do, fellow kids" for why people should just convert to Rust, and stop bothering doing stuff in C and C/C++

 Everytime people do not kiss Rust's butt enough, there is always several people who come in, and are all, "okay, but Rust is the new trendy hotness. Only old out of touch unfashionable people considered C++"

Which is ridiculous, as the notion that people are attempting to be trendy and fashionable with programming stuff is a weird culture shift, that is not going to convince any of the "old heads" who are programming in C or C/C++

Most people, going back about a decade or so ago, were not going into programming because it was "trendy". It not being trendy was actually a deciding factor for many of them

I mean, to me it is weird that a bunch of Millennials and Gen Z are upset that "they are no longer able to keep up with the cool teenagers". I wasn't even cool or hip as a teenager myself. It would actually be alarming to me if I was cool or hip or "rizz-tastic" to teenagers today. My "Skibidi Ohio Rizz" is nothing new, and I only imagine it will continue to be how stuff works out

Besides, being "kewl" is such a flash in the pan notion anyways, that building up knowledge bases around it, only really makes sense for pointing out how much it is flash in the pan. Often all sizzle and no flavour type deals

But this sort of peer-pressure seems to be something that the Rust-Community is making seem like it actually is working to get people into Rust. As well, reality is extremely mutable in today's online world. You can just lie, and people will take it as fact (See: lit. everything GamerGate has done)

 It mostly seems to be upsetting people not already 100% down with Ride Or Die for the Rust Community

Which mostly results in the Martyr Complex in the Ride Or Die section of the Rust Community. Which seems to be the majority of the Rust Community

Now, this was present for the Ruby Language Community. It did not "prove" the Ruby Language Community was evil or whatever. This is why this concept ends up getting listed as a "Yellow Flag" as oppose to a "Red Flag" or a "Disqualification"

But the fact that you so often get one of the main ways people sell Rust being the same methods that were used to sell cigarettes in the 50s and 60s... is well... kind of not surprising that so many people actually respond to this sales strategy with hostility

Just replace Malboro-Man or the Cartoon Camel on a backpacking hike through the mountains just covered with bitches due to their swag... with Rust-Lang 

And again, the fact this completely backfires in convincing those already not convinced appears to be a FEATURE and not a bug--as it helps have people into Rust stuck in the Martyr Complex

You know, think about how the whole door-to-door thing with Jehovah's Witnesses is not there to convince you to join their group. It is more there to isolate the people doing the door-to-door thing, and have them understand there is nothing that exists for them outside of their little "Fun Time Happy Group" (I feel like using the word "Cult" would give more power to the metheodology to trap them, and thus while correct, it is not helpful)

The Scambait Susceptible Nature of the Community  

"Look, others might have a 'Free Candy' sign. To get their meals delivered, that is. I have found much better results self-help books where I puff up how they 'Are Just Built Different' and that they are the Special Hero of Legend(TM). You might recognise me from my other book Build Your Own Mythical Sword of Legend and Valour which sells gangbusters in the Self-Help market. So many heroes pumped up into thinking they will slay me walk into my lair, and I have my choice of so many options of preparing them. You know, even if I wasn't going to put ketchup on them afterwards" -- Frigyth The Grumpy, Musings Before Ketchup

Now, this is another thing that isn't a direct mark against Rust... but more indicates an "Unwitting Pawn" type deal is going on with them

Most of them are "the younger kids", as well the whole "Peer Pressure Man, PEER MOTHER FSCKING PRESSURE MAN!" methodology won't work on computer dorks beyond a certain age range (well, actually computer dorks, it works on Investors and Managers who just want to believe they are computer dorks, despite not knowing anything apart from what Glossy Says) 

Due to how poorly maintained (or rather how successfully hidden) computer history actually is--it results in them not knowing how to ferret out some rather basic notions. For example, many of these "younger kids" do not know the difference between a Glossy and Actual Documentation

A good chunk of them will confuse a YouTube video with "actual documentation on a project"

The "videos are not documentation" is a rather recent thing to be demonstrated as dumb and stupid pitfall, as it was one of the things that kind of interfered with Ruby getting anyway decent. Yes, Ruby is all over the place and a decent language... but the fact that instead of documenting its stuff, people would just make videos instead, interfered with Ruby actually going places. The Ruby Manual and the Pickaxe were largely filled with sections that were "this will be filled in later" for much of the time Ruby was "The Trendy New Thing(TM)(C)(R)"

But we get a bunch of people who have a warped understanding of how technological progression operates, due to the narrative version of history just omitting mention of a fair amount of technologies that could make their own book of "Roadkill on the Information Superhighway"--heck a lot of them have no idea why the term "Information Superhighway" got coined. They know it is not really a decent term for what ended up playing out--but how stuff ended up getting laid out at the time, it wasn't as bad of a term as it is today

The notion of "we must focus on the new, as understanding the old is a waste of time" creates a situation where people will keep making the same mistakes over and over again 

The Rust Community has had a large amount of it fall for the "BlockChain is the Future" scam--and many of them are currently being taken by the AI-Grift. Even Rust Community members who aren't total TechBros

The whole "every new advancement is a thing that happens" has been, repetitively, shown to not be a thing. Yes, a lot of stuff Sega was experimenting with in the 90s did eventually happen... but that does not mean investing in Sega in the 90s was not a horrid idea. There was a lot of things that made it so that stuff was not going to happen at that time. Issues and problems that needed to be addressed before that stuff can be handled

The whole "the future is inevitable" kind of ends up being deployed in a way that results in people ignoring all the problems and issues with a technology, that, at the very least, results in it "not quite yet the future" 

Think of it like why SteamPunk was not actually feasible as a thing during the Victorian or Edwardian eras. As there was plenty of stuff that would not allow such a thing to actually be done. Not just societal stuff--but other technologies that are required as prerequisites that would not be in place until over half a century later. When most of that SteamPunk stuff would be redundant at best

This is without the parts of technology that ended up being irrelevant due to not understanding what it is that needs to be solved

I'd point to Internet2, HTTP2 and XHTML2 being a good marker in history, for a future technology that did not understand the problems it was attempt to deal with in advancement. In that it failed to understand the problem so hard, that a version of "Extra Glitchy HTML4" that was effectively "Oops All MissingNo." for web standards ended up being the defacto standard for how Websites work and operate to this day

Another example would be the IBM PC2 architecture, due to it trying to wrassle control of the market back from the PC-Compatible Market. Not understanding that by allowing third parties to do stuff, those third parties would end up looking like MadCatz style products, compared to the "Official and High Quality" IBM solutions. Allowing them to sell most of their stuff via Aura on the market. Even in cases where the Official IBM PC hardware was the worst product on every level, it would be the more coveted of the products

By allowing a situation where you had the option of people opting to the MadCatz-style third party products, you allowed more access to your own product's ecosystem. In a way that has your products being considered the preferred and better purchase

Another example would be Adobe's Suite of creativity software. While this stuff has not yet tanked--it will be tanking in the next five years. As the main reason it got to where it was, was due to rampant piracy of the software. Essentially, teenagers and college students would acquire a pirated version of the software. Learn how to do stuff on the pirated version--and then when they went to get a job doing the stuff, they ended up paying for the official full version. Effectively creating an industry standard via the method of turning a blind eye to rampant software piracy. With Adobe locking down on this method, we are going to see a reduction of people learning how to use Adobe's suite of tools--and its losing is status as the Industry Standard

Now... most of this stuff is not taught as part of history

Most you get is how GOPHER was not as good with doing stuff with HTML, and thus we do not use it anymore because HTTP is the future. Except, there is really no reason that you could not do an HTML over GOPHER setup. With a fair amount of server-end CGI/WSI/ASP stuff being handled by system permissions and GOPHER itself. With GOPHER being used to help deal with mirroring, discoverability and all that other stuff. With the various search engine functionality working with GOPHER working to improve access to these documents

We don't use GOPHER, and it is not because HTTP is really that much better. We use HTTP because we use HTTP

So, by omitting a large amount of technological history, and by also spinning a narrative to that history that is inaccurate (at best)... we've created a new generation of technology users, that are not equiped to deal with various scams

The Block-Chain Failure

Block-Chain was a very easy thing to see failing. As well, the reasons why we shifted from Dumb Terminals Talking With Mainframes to having Microcomputers, PETS and eventually Personal Computers, should have shown the various issues with getting that to be adopted. Yes, there are use cases for having a dumb terminal talking to a bigger computer somewhere else... but the Block-chain kind of was terrible at addressing those use-cases

There really was no real valid use-case for The Block-Chain, other than "it is new and shiny, and you use to be able to buy drugs using it"

With a long list of flaws, cons and issues with attempting to use it

Any amount of properly taught history of Computer-Science would have had most of the people adopting it, see the problem from a mile away

Oddly enough, a fair amount of the Rust Community were people who really saw no issue with the promise that the Block-Chain was the future

This is not so much a Red Flag on its own... more just stuff to support that the Yellow Flag that the Rust Community seems to attract a lot of people who are VERY susceptible towards getting scammed

 

The AI-Grift

 The AI-Grift has already happened once already

This is very much a case of "those who learn history, are doomed to watch everybody else around them repeat it"

 The main difference between the AI-Grift now, and how it played out in the 1970s, is these days, most people have computers as part of their everyday lives. Back in the 1970s, it was mostly in big universities, or people with a _LOT_ of disposable income who enjoyed building electronics. The hobbyists were largely an offshoot from model railway enjoyers and people into HAM Radio. With a lot of "Microcomputers" being "stupid tricks you can do with HAM Radio parts"

We have computers everywhere these days--with a highly narrative version of the history around them. Ignoring a lot of stories and elements that would call that narrative's accuracy into question

A fair amount of the Rust Community appear to be people who have fallen for the AI-Grift. Including a bunch that you could not really call TechBros

Part of this is a large amount of people in the Rust Community's inability to tell the difference between a Glossy and Actual Documentation

Again, not an actual Red Flag... but more supporting the Yellow Flag that a good chunk of the Rust Community are people who would be described as Scambait.

 Lack of Proper History is a Bigger Problem Being Shown Here

 Mostly due to the really crappy job The Field of Computer Science has had with handling The History of Computer Science 

It should be noted this issue with maintaining the history is not just an issue with Computer Science... but an issue present in all "Smart People Fields" of work. Except, maybe, Structural Engineering

With the History of Physics, History of Medicine, History of Psychology (and its siblings, History of Para-Psychology and History of The Esoteric Arts), History of Maths, History of Chemistry and several other fields being largely discounted as "important to learn"--you create a population that ends up doing "Science as a Dogmatic Religion", "Maths As Enochian" and other really really silly mistakes

Many people will claim "they need to focus on the humanities"--and yes having the humanities understood as "really fscking gosh darn important, damn it!" is something that is needed as well

A good portion of the current Rise of Fascism we are currently seeing is being fuelled by a lack of study of the history of these things 

Heck, there are even things Liberals and some Leftists say that would be improved with knowledge of the history of these various "Smart People Fields" of work. So this works as a bit of "But Both Sides" Cheese to attempt to get a dog to swallow a hard pill

The Popper's Paradox Avoidance Issue

"As a child, I played in the local little league. Honestly, I'd actually have less issues with the Entire Teams of Dogs Playing Baseball trend (as a result of a bit of rulebending), if they ever actually placed decently. They generally were always middle of the road. Sometimes the worst in the league (before the team went to a farm somewhere upstate). Though they never placed on top. Which just kind of always irked me. Seems like this bending of a nonexistent rule was just a bad play to begin with" -- Vincent Chadwick Thundersexsmith, Hero of Legend

Another thing I've noticed with the Rust's Communities issues that exists as mostly a Yellow Card, is they seem to have issues understanding Popper's Paradox

Which is REALLY REALLY Weird, as the basic functionality they advertise for how their language is better, should have them knowing better

 If you look at how they handle licenses (and help from Microsoft), you will notice that many of them seem allergic towards the GPL. With the mostly being all "well these licenses give us more freedom"

 Now, it is tempting to do ye ole "Freedom to do what?" in a rhyming manner with ye ole "States Rights to do What?"

But the thing is, the reason why the GPL says this stuff that is not stated in the MIT and Apache Licenses, is because it is THE VERY JOB OF THE LICENSE to actually determine this stuff. That is WHY you have the license there

It is like choosing a rulebook, that doesn't clearly state a bunch of rules, over a rulebook, that states where/how/why/when you can have a Dog play baseball. By choosing the rulebook that doesn't have stuff about whether or not a dog can play baseball, one has to determine you are choosing that rulebook, because you intend to have a dog play baseball

With the league that chooses the rulebook that is very lenient on actually having rules in the rulebook (you know, acting contrary the reason why you would have a rulebook), will eventually start running into teams that are entirely comprised of dogs playing baseball. With the treatment of those dogs being questionable at best (most likely very poor at worse)

This sounds like a "slipperly slope" type deal--except history of the usage of the MIT License actually backs this up

What ends up happening with the MIT License is it results in high amounts of Walled Gardens, and "pay for deluxe customer access" type deals going into place. This is actually one of the main issues that caused problems with Linux getting access to the desktop for multiple decades. Including a decade where Linux itself did not even exist yet

By creating a Caste System for software access and usage... you ultimately create a system where software does not get usage or access being done onto it

Microsoft mostly only got to where it is via turning a blind eye to people pirating its products and by very fscking terrible interactions with hardware manufacturers that made it so their stuff was a form of "Default Firmware". Most people will not change their default Firmware. Hence why MacOS-Classic won out over BeOS and AmigaOS. With both of those being systems you'd by a MacOS-Classic, and then install a better OS onto said hardware. Which had a side effect that every BeOS or AmigaOS users were contributing to the success of MacOS-Classic, ontop of the people contributing to the MacOS-Classic's own success

You know, on top of having hooks in its software that would detect competitor's products, and sabotage them from working. One major one being present in Win 3.x's codebase 

The MIT License is one that actually very much allows for Microsoft's Hooks to disable competitors software. Which is where it "not actually having a rule for that" results in a system where the outcome is less permissible, due to stuff not being explicitly stated

The Rust Community seems to not understand that we've literally seen Popper's Paradox play out in real time multiple times with several communities around us

WizardChan/8Chan is one example where the belief of "The Market Place of Ideas Will Have the Better Ideas Rise to the Top" was put to the extreme test. Turns out, the Market Place of Ideas is a religious belief that is about as at odds with the Real World(TM) as the notions of "The Rapture will occur in 1918", and "The Healing Powers of Electricity"

In that, while it does sound very sound in a very specific set of spiritual or religious doctrine (which Economics, and the Parishes of Economies that are the various Capitalisms being very much religious/spiritual ideologies)... applying it into the real world, can show that it might not actually reflect much more than various incorrect axioms of said spiritualities and religions

 Much like when the axioms of various spiritualities and religions are incorrect axioms, you see a lot of stuff that is part of the doctrine of the various Capitalisms being highly resisted against how reality responds towards it

There seems to be a bit of immaturity in the Rust Community, that seems to be very specifically currated by how the community works. I will not say this is "by design"--as it appears to be a very accidental set of stuff that has brought this group together to exist as "UnwittingPawns" to other Powers That Be LTD 

But by not specifically given rules for stuff, the effectively end up demonstrating the Paradox of Tolerance, via way of how people would misuse No Rule Says a Dog Cannot Play Baseball

I mean, "Air Bud" itself is a fun bit of a movie--with the entire franchising kind of dropping off after a bit. As it is largely an escapist fantasy

We literally have corporations misusing the concepts of Vegetarian, Veganism, Free Range Farming, Pro-Organic, Anti-Factory-Farms, Anti-DRM-Crops, etc., to make things even worse, than the situations people who, understandably, take stances around this are actually concerned about

Like, we need to understand that the whole Monkey-Paw/Jackass-Genie trope is actually quite a bit nicer and kinder than what we've literally seen every Jack Welch inspired corporation do since the 1980s

As a result, when doing wishes on a Monkey-Paw you'd need to be very specific to avoid your wish leading to your own hubris... when it comes to Software Licenses, including stuff with the GPL, you need to also be rather specific

Otherwise, you will create a situation where the outcome is the least permissible thing ever

So, again, it is REALLY REALLY WEIRD how the Rust Community kind of misses this side of things, with the main selling point of their language

Other Stuff

 "And then the Spiritual Light of True Awakening spoketh to us: not listing other options shall be taken as proof those other options are not there. Oversight cannot exist, as such would be blasphemous to listening to the inner light. A thing everybody does--and people who don't agree with The Awakened Light of Tommorrow, is purposely acting in Malice. This is proven by them stating stuff that goes against what we have decried the Inner Light has declared! If they spoke truth, their Inner Light would never have their lists be incomplete! The truth is demonstrated by its perfect circle shape" -- The Awakened Light of Tomorrow, The Book to Go Above Books

There is OTHER stuff that kind of exists as either a Yellow Flag... or "Not Against the Rules, But Frowned Upon" or "This is Technically Okay, but the Referee is Now Watching You" type status 

I don't have it in a decent "write it down in a blog type manner" at this point in time, though

If I was able to look into it more, and sit down, this stuff will come up

And again, the whole thing with Rust is there are not much for any real Red Flags. At most it is all Yellow Flags--with the best case scenario being "this is a group of very Scambait type sorts" with how things stand

Due to the Martyr Status being a main way that the community retains itself... I can only imagine everything said against them, will be used for them to justify that they are in fact correct, and the person talking against them does not understand they are truly the force of good 

Which is a very useful mindset for an UnwittingPawn type person