Could you explain a bit more? Not sure what is achieved by forcing people to renew their visas from abroad. I appreciate that, philosophically, it is a way of setting requirements higher, but it does not strike me as principled.
From my perspective as an immigrant in the UK, there have got to be so many parameters the UK government can adjust before indulging into performative cruelty. Setting higher requirements for visas, revising what jobs qualify for Skilled Worker visas and such. In fact, my understanding is that this is exactly what they have been doing (rather mildly), and it's been successful.
If the government refuses a visa renewal while the person is in the country and they don’t comply you have to deport them, which is often problematic.
If you make it standard procedure that everyone has to leave the country temporarily to renew their visa, the person is already outside your country when you refuse the renewal.
Instead of having a deportation challenged in court and mired in paperwork, you simply don’t let them back in. That’s what the parent comment was getting at.
Not saying this is right or wrong or it will necessarily happen in the UK, but it’s the kind of change you can make if you want to quietly reduce immigration without fuss about deportations.
And that does seem to be the direction that UK policy is going, albeit currently only with baby steps
This would be true if visa and status were the same thing. In the US, they are not. Whether you are legally present in the US is governed by status. So what happens is that your status is valid and even renewed or extended in the US. But your visa expires. And you need to renew the visa just to bring the date on the visa to the same date as your status. You literally go to the consulate and show them your other status document, and they stamp your passport with the date from the other status document. It's all quite silly. A bit like the movie Brazil.
I find this quite confusing, but then I am far from being an expert on the matter:
* Do we expect a high number of people applying for visa renewals and getting rejected? How come? Otherwise, when it comes to people illegally overstaying their visas, how does this policy idea address intentional non-compliance?
* Don't legal challenges to deportation of criminals have to do with the deportation rather than visas. It would be convenient if hardened criminals complied with the law and removed the need to deport them, but what would motivate them to do so?
The idea seems to be to inconvenience law-abiding visa holders without addressing major concerns, but then I probably misunderstand the concerns. For instance, maybe there is a way of creating legal busy-work when one's visa renewal application gets rejected in a way that is cheap to the individual, but costly for the state, and that this happens on a scale that makes the problem significant. Sounds surprising, and surprising that there'd be no other way to avoid that too!
It is also a good thing, because it helps to refine the theorem statement. At least, my humble experience in CS theory research is that I’d try to prove a theorem I want to be true, find a counterexample, refine the statement, and continue.
P.S. It helps that in CS lots of theorems are about either inductive or coinductive definitions.
> if you’re not educated in the Soviet Union you will know it
My grandparents and parents and siblings all learned Ukrainian in school during Soviet times. This is in what now would be considered a predominantly Russian-speaking part of Ukraine btw.
Perhaps, but presumably code that is meant to have an external interface will be in a module and will have an *.mli file to it, and that is an excellent place to constrain your types explicitly if you must.
What does it mean that Arm is headquartered in the UK, practically speaking? What kind of a change would need to happen for, say, the Austin office to become the headquarter?
If I remember one of the original conditions put on the acquisition of ARM by the UK gov was that HQ stays in the UK. So I doubt that will change. Can't say I'm familiar with the tangible benefits, but I assume is exposes ARM to UK law and regulation more than if the HQ was in another country. And retains some jobs in the UK.
There must be some benefit for governments to make such a request.
> Unfortunately these things are reportedly happening, the sentiment should be anti-Putin but ends up being anti-Russian, mostly thanks to Russians like these: https://t.me/glavredinfo/61841
If you don't mind me asking, why should the sentiment be anti-Putin? What makes you think that the war is not being supported by a significant fraction (if not majority) of the Russian population?
There is no question there is broad support for senseless violence, as evidenced by the video. But I know my friend for example, and he considers Putin and his enablers to be fascists. But of course there are also many people privately against this while publically showing support.
The point of my post was that it is not enough to help anti-Putin (and by that I mean anti-current-power-system-of-russia) leave Russia. They are as much victims here as Ukrainians who fled the war, but are sometimes treated badly.
You are making it sound like a burden, but I do not understand why it would be. Surely you are interested in safety checks giving you more confidence that you are positioning yourself to take advantage of the Arm ecosystem (instead of releasing something that is not supportable by compilers and OS experts)?.. Or am I misunderstanding the nature of the compliance tests?
I think the compliance tests were making sure that your add instruction or memory load instruction followed the spec.
You mention ARM ecosystem and that is precisely the point. Apple controls their ecosystems. How do you write apps for the iPhone? You use Apple's development environment with Apple's compiler. If Apple decided NOT to implement an instruction for some reason they could simply make their compiler never output that instruction.
I worked on chips that ran embedded applications with no ability for ordinary users to change the software. What is the value of meeting an external ARM controlled spec for that?
I also worked on chips that only ran Android and nothing else. If you are also the company porting Android and writing all drivers for your own platform then people may argue whether it is worth only being 99% compatible.
Later I worked on chips where people may run Android, Windows Mobile, or plain Linux on this chip using GCC, Clang, Microsoft's compiler, or whatever. For that you definitely wanted to comply with specs.
> Is learning any sort of Assembly language a good investment of time?
Learning to understand Arm architecture specifically or computer architecture in general can be invaluable. A particular Assembly syntax is just a way of expressing what you want to do.
I would suggest reading a book about computer architecture or taking a course. And if you are like me and are interested in what complicated things hardware does to fulfil the needs of software, you might want to first read a book on operating systems (like OSTEP by Arpaci-Dusseaus, which is marvel of accessibility and challenge for students), because it will make you ask relevant question.
From my perspective as an immigrant in the UK, there have got to be so many parameters the UK government can adjust before indulging into performative cruelty. Setting higher requirements for visas, revising what jobs qualify for Skilled Worker visas and such. In fact, my understanding is that this is exactly what they have been doing (rather mildly), and it's been successful.