The only was I can remember which is port and starboard is by thinking about boarding an airplane. The steps/tunnel are always docked on the 'port' side, just as boats always dock on the port side. The cockpit/bow is always on your left when you board.
Not hidden in the knitting in the sense of the specific stitches (which is also very cool: https://www.popsci.com/story/diy/secret-code-messages-knitti...) but it seems she needed the knitting needle to insert the one-time codes (on a piece of silk) into a shoelace. Amazing story.
One route to understanding how CPUs work is to explore the computers that have been made in cellular automata. Golly (https://golly.sourceforge.net/) has several, including one by John von Neumann, one by Edgar Codd and another by John Devore. The advantage of course is that the physics is trivial and you can see everything that happens and step backwards and forwards.
Gödel's incompleteness isn't a practical obstacle to proof assistants - it will never stop us formalizing proofs and searching for new theorems. It's irrelevant to their operation and will continue to be for all time.
If Gödel's incompleteness applies to the theorem you are trying to prove then it means that the theorem has been very carefully set up with reference to the axioms that you are using in order to be unprovable. It's not something you will stumble across otherwise.
Think of it like this: imagine knowing that maths will stop working if a certain very specific enormous number appears in your calculation. This would keep mathematicians up at night with worry but it would have no practical effect on anyone else because the enormous number simply never appears.
Imagine how much nicer the cities of the world would become with many of the offices turned into residential. There would be a rebirth of local community.
An object at rest is still travelling through time. In fact it continues to travel at the same speed through spacetime when you let it go. It's just that spacetime is distorted such that the straight line takes it across space too, as seen in the inertial frame on the right.
With two space dimensions and one time dimension (2+1), an orbit in Newtonian physics is a helix. In general relativity that same helical path would be a straight line in an interestingly curved spacetime.
Likewise I guess for the 1D gravity well case, where a sine wave would become a straight line in spacetime.
Yes perfect regulation is impossible and yes it's an arms race but it's one we have to keep fighting. The alternative (less regulation) is far worse. We've tried that.
I like JavaScript a lot, I've got no problem with it. But when WebAssembly can access the DOM (or replace it) it seems likely that performance-critical code will use that instead.
Is there still a need for performant JavaScript now that we have WebAssembly?
Edit: Apologies for wording this poorly. Clearly there is a need for performant JavaScript. My question is more about how much we expect WebAssembly to take over from what JavaScript is currently used for. Thank you for all the insightful comments!