bc569a80a344f9c

In your cake shop example, the more accurate version would be some gay couples only agreeing to buy wedding cakes from cake shops with gay bakers.

On account of it's the customer choosing the service provider, albeit with the help of filters provided by an aggregator, instead of service providers denying service to customers based on their belonging to a class.

edit: I missed that you can, as a woman driver, also filter out male riders.

I prefer my MacBook, but the Thinkpad whatever I bought to have Windows and Linux available for some software I need occasionally has a fingerprint reader that worked out of the box on Ubuntu.

From what I understand, it depends on the stage. The United States Code certainly tracks any and all amendments, and you can fully trace which member introduced which amendment, when and where it passed, and even verbatim floor debate.

However, the draft stage isn't documented this way. Members negotiate whatever between themselves (well, really their staffers) and this happens over email, in discussions, via Word documents - whatever works.

I guess in the git metaphor, drafts are in flux while being worked on as a commit, and are squashed and then accessible as such squashed commits once initially introduced or whenever they lead to bill amendments. You can't necessarily track down what member was responsible for a specific sentence in an amendment.

I adore Canticle. It is one of my favorite books.

I had recommended Hyperion to a friend, and they loved it. I recommended Canticle as a follow-up and they hated it. I never figured out how that can be.

The shit people tell you about themselves for free, unprompted. It’s unreal.

Kind of but not really.

The whole point of BGP is to influence your routing tables. This fundamentally makes very little sense to do when you have a bunch of routers whose routing policy you don't control between you and whoever you're speaking BGP to. eBGP is just TCP and supports knobs to run over multiple hops (so up to 255), but at that point you can't really do anything with the routing information you exchange because the moment you hand the traffic off, the other party can do with it how it pleases. Also, very few people have enough public IP addresses for this, and on the Internet you obviously can't route RFC1918 space. Therefore, you need tunnels, so that you can be one hop away even if the tunneled traffic is traversing the Internet, and so that you can reach peers that let you announce whatever IP space you want.

The other thing you can do, of course, is to just do the same thing internal to your lab. You can absolutely stand up multiple ASN at home. I'd even argue that if you really want to learn BGP, this is a great way to do it, especially if you use two different platforms (say, FRR on FreeBSD peering with a cheap Mikrotik running RouterOS). That way you learn the underlying protocol and not a specific implementation, which is something that is very hard to undo in junior network engineers that have only ever been exposed to one way of doing things.

That's different from some of the goals outlined in the article, but if your goal is to learn this stuff rather than have provider-independent IP space (which even for home labs isn't very valuable to most people), doing it all yourself works fine.

Even if yawning in public affected sexual fitness: how long has it been socially impolite to yawn in public? Evolution takes a rather long time in species with long reproductive cycles. Almost all mammals yawn, it would take significant genetic changes to breed that out of us. That doesn't happen overnight.

it would be just nice to quickly change (or even better: have access to multiple at once!) networks.

Accessing multiple corporate networks simultaneously from the same endpoint violates all sorts of access policies. If it doesn’t, the access policy is lacking. Even for startups.

And no, unless you build it and enforce it from the start, no one ever succeeds in bolting on a reasonably security posture after implementing all their other processes no one will dare touch.

It's fine if all you need is a packet filter, but in 2026 I question that many production use cases can get away with just packet filter.

As a host firewall, it's obviously fine, I assume your question is about using pf as a network firewall. Given the threat landscape, you usually want threat protection. At the very least that means close-to-real-time updates from reputation lists. You can script that with pf, but it's not fun. Really, you want protocol dissection and - quite possibly - the ability to decrypt on the box and do payload analysis. Just doing packet filtering doesn't buy you all that much anymore these days, and anything production that requires compliance or that you genuinely care about should be behind what you might also call IPS or layer 7 firewall capabilities.

pf doesn't do any of that. You don't have to use Palo Alto or Cisco for this, either.

If all you need is packet filtering, it's a good option, though.

almost all humans use computers but only 0.1% or so can program them.

This is nitpicking but I was curious: there are 4.4 million software developers in the US (https://www.griddynamics.com/blog/number-software-developers...). The population is 340 million, 0.1% would be 340,000. You’re off by over one order of magnitude.

They’re both short stories, less than 10 minutes to read.

If you’d like to read novel length LeGuin, “The Left Hand Of Darkness” and “The Dispossessed” are excellent. Much of her most lauded work shares a universe, but each novel stands alone and doesn’t share relevant characters, let alone protagonists.

Edit: „The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas“ can be read at https://shsdavisapes.pbworks.com/f/Omelas.pdf

https://clarkesworldmagazine.com/kim_02_24/

Why Don’t We Just Kill The Kid In The Omelas Hole by Isabel Kim. My favorite short story of 2024, and very much worth reading if you’re at all familiar with LeGuin’s original story.

That’s a great way of explaining why this was historically done.

The previous diagram absolutely does not have positive and negative for each transaction!

But it does. The $500 transaction for furniture is an edge from the bank to the furniture asset account. This edge is outgoing from the bank account (-$500) and incoming to the furniture asset account (+$500). That’s it, that’s double entry bookkeeping. Each edge represents both entries.

IP addresses in both protocols are just a sequence of bits. Combined with a subnet mask (or prefix length, the more modern term for the same concept) they divide into a network portion and a host portion. The former tells you what network the host is on, the latter uniquely identifies the host on that network. This is exactly the same for both protocols.

Or what do you mean by “parts of an IPv4 address and their meaning”?

That multicast on IPv4 isn’t used as much is irrelevant. It functions the same way in both protocols.

It’s not _that_ different. Larger address space, more emphasis on multicast for some basic functions. If you understand those functions in IPv4, learning IPv6 is very straightforward. There’s some footguns once you get to enterprise scale deployments but that’s just as true of IPv4.

But TCP or HTTP don’t care about the underlying transport. They’re higher level protocols that are payloads to either IPv4 or IPv6. It’s irrelevant what the transport is when dissecting HTTP and very little time should be spent on it.

IPv4 is, for all intents and purposes, still the default transport. It’s also simpler than IPv6 in some regards. When teaching layer 3, it makes sense to teach both, and teach IPv4 first. Though I fully agree that they should be taught with equal emphasis. I don’t doubt there’s a good number of programs out there that don’t into sufficient detail on IPv6.

An alternative is that he isn’t on that list because he’s a bad person, like Hitler. He’s on a list of people GP doesn’t want to read. He doesn’t want to read Hitler because Hitler is a bad person, he doesn’t want to read Dan Brown because Dan Brown’s prose is clumsy and not worth reading, and he doesn’t want to read Ayn Rand for both reasons. (Sorry for the dig at the end. I think that’s funny).

A man who built what he loves and produced so much surplus value for the rest of us to enjoy (read: profit) is _exactly_ a hero.

Life imitates art, I suppose.

https://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a16995

“Democracy in the US is failing because of the resources invested into public transit” might be the hottest take I’ve read in 2025. Nice.

One of the achievements in my career I’m lowkey proudest of is sneaking in the rewire of about 45,000 ports on a campus that were split pair after an explicit project to do so was shot down.

Comparing one billion exact copies of the exact same thing to a different thing that shares some superficial qualities doesn’t make any sense whatsoever when the GP is simply saying that among the huge quantity of content on TikTok and YouTube some short form videos are are as artistically valuable as the best examples of any other more traditional media forms.

Edit: to phrase it differently, GP stated that among the huge quantity of content on TikTok and YouTube some short form videos are are as artistically valuable as the best examples of any other more traditional media forms. The short form content on both platforms isn’t all good, but there is so much variety that some of it is. You responded that Coca Cola isn’t an Imperial Stout. It isn’t, but that has absolutely nothing to do with GP’s point.

It says network routing issue.

Network routes consist of a network (a range of IPs) and a next hop to send traffic for that range to.

These can overlap. Sometimes that’s desirable, sometimes it is not. When routers have two routes that are exactly the same they often load balance (in some fairly dumb, stateless fashion) between possible next hops, when one of the routes is more specific, it wins.

Routes get injected by routers saying “I am responsible for this range” and setting themselves as the next hop, others routers that connect to them receive this advertisement and propagate it to their own router peers further downstream.

An example would be advertising 192.168.0.0/23, which is the range of 192.168.0.0-192.168.1.255.

Let’s say that’s your inference backend in some rows in a data center.

Then, through some misconfiguration, some other router starts announcing 192.168.1.0/24 (192.168.1.0-192.168.1.255). This is more specific, that traffic gets sent there, and half of the original inference pod is now unreachable.

“Just let students vibe code your ERP” is a hell of a take.

Whatever you’re using handles international employees (UW has visiting faculty)? It has a student information module to enable course selection, grading records, transcript requests, etc? It supports multi-role entities so you can track workers that are also alums, students that are also workers, and any other weird combination universities run into?

I mean, I’m not saying that $266m isn’t ridiculous and that Workday isn’t very expensive, but to pretend that UW can just use whatever your small company ended up with as a major ERP isn’t realistic. They need to track 35k staff (UW includes a full health system) and 50k students. There’s three total software packages you can take seriously on the market for this, and they all suck in their own way and are all ridiculously expensive and hard to implement.

Edit: wrong university. UWash is much smaller on both staff and students.

I provide infrastructure for such a cluster that is also available to anyone at the university free of charge. Every year we swap out the oldest 20% of the cluster as we run a five year depreciation schedule. In the last three years, we’ve mostly been swapping in GPU resources at a ration of about 3:1. That’s in response to both usage reports and community surveys.

I’m not nitpicking as such, I’m just providing a counterexample because it is rather rare for a company to spell it out:

In order to achieve our mission, we will conduct our business with the following Code of Ethics in mind:

Obey the law.

Take care of our members.

Take care of our employees.

Respect our suppliers.

If we do these four things throughout our organization, then we will achieve our ultimate goal, which is to reward our shareholders.

https://customerservice.costco.com/app/answers/answer_view/a...

This comment kind of reminded me of a YouTube channel I completely adore. AnyAustin (https://www.youtube.com/@any_austin) has quite a few videos exploring and celebrating open world video games.

The second link parent posted literally explains it, which makes their "oh no, German in 2025 so broken" quite puzzling:

Es gibt viel zu viele Waschbären, um mit den erlaubten jagdlichen Mitteln im städtischen Umfeld eine nachhaltige Bestandsreduzierung bewirken zu können, denn Waschbären können hohe Verlustraten durch vermehrte Fortpflanzung ausgleichen. Je mehr Waschbären getötet werden, umso mehr Jungtiere kommen nach. Die vielen Jungtiere machen aber unter Umständen mehr Probleme als die Alten, und die Gefahr einer Ausbreitung von Krankheiten und Parasiten wird durch die abwandernden Jungtiere erhöht statt vermindert.

There are too many raccoons for permitted hunting methods within an urban context to have a sufficient effect on population numbers as raccoons react to high death rates with increased breeding. The more raccoons are killed, the more young are born. The large amount of young raccoons can create more problems than older animals, and the danger of spreading disease and parasites is increased as young animals roam from established territories.

tl;dr: you're not allowed to just randomly shoot shit in urban areas because duh, the population is too large for trapping, and the raccoons are just gonna fuck more and then go a-wandering, making everything worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45885813

Because this place loves outrage just as much as any other community. And it’s no fun to make fun of others in a thread that gets flagged and hidden.