cfv

Apologies in advance if this sounds excessively rude, but I'm not asking for anything as there's noone to actually ask to, I'm asking about that.

That distinction matters, since I personally find it easier to derive enthusiasm from concrete, tangible tools that may prevent the entire species as a thing from dying choked in a toxic miasma of our own creation than from the purely numeric advances in our grasp of the rules of a universe we're basically guests in.

So... no?

So, the biggest question I have about all this eminently theoretical physics video thing is, has anyone ever managed to experimentally demonstrate you can __voluntarily__ bend the brane our reality resides on by any measurable amount, and also demonstrate this causes an actual translation in 3d space? At all? Ever?

Or are we conjecturing what would happen if this was even slightly viable?

We've only very recently managed to experimentally demonstrate that unimaginably huge cataclismic events can make this happen, but, has anyone ever built some device that can make a crease of any significance at all in reality, and do so at will?

It'd be absolutely bonkers if you could use this exact same DSL to generate valid strings

Here's an idea:

- Move all documents to a simple doc server like idk Alfresco

- Any any all single read requests to this server are authorized after biometric confirmation of any parties involved, which are then added to the users' "file".

- Any one use of this data that can be construed as malicious carries 4 to 8 years of jail for anyone involved in the chain of custody of the specific bits of misused data.

You don't need superstars on the project, you need the right balance of incentives around mucking with it.

OK, given the sudden surge in anonymous morons unable to follow basic prompts for civil discussion and the refusal of the implementors to do something about the mounting garbage on this site, I'm adding hacker news to my block list.

I'm done with y'all.

It's oddly infuriating to read this from a "developing" (ie poor) country.

We get permanently schooled by all this rich countries who ransacked both our and later their natural resources in order to build themselves into prosperity.

Yes, it would be awesome if every one of us adopted a hectare of land and personally hugged every little bird and fox every day to try ensure their precious existence (which is undoubtedly precious and a tragedy if lost), but we cannot and won't do that if they sit on a source of precious, scarce income.

It's because of stuff lke this that poachers exist; you don't risk death to kill rhinos for eating, you do it because you may feed your family for a week by selling a chunk of it.

People don't risk angering whatever arcane disease some random swamp animal has for the thrill of it, they do because that's their only means of making money.

If richer countries wanted to stop poorer countries from exploiting whatever sources of income they can find, then they should help build other means of obtaining said income.

As in, not just throwing money at people and expecting that to magically solve anything, but actually build means of making a living and doing so in a way that doesn't set up a predatory structure like businesses will do.

EDIT: Loving the insta-downvote with no comment. Please, come out of hiding and explain yourselves.

Yeah... About that... I mean... no. When the possible death of thousands upon thousands of people is on the line, your proposal better be ironclad and well equipped to stand many lines of attack if you want it to be taken seriously.

"Hey maybe let's not do the one massively researched thing that we've done since times of the plague because there's not enough data" is neither of those things.

Open dialogue in science needs to take place in the forums already in place, not on clickbaity money-starved legacy media.

EDIT: Dear rando downvoters, please instead of lurking help foster debate by stating why in your opinion untestable indefensible claims should be allowed to pass as science in the name of "open dialogue".

Twitter has degenerated into one of the least friendly things to build an app for. I've had a better dev experience with Gab, ffs.

Not only that, but also their community building and tending is abysmal too, so your app will end up used mostly by the kind of user that brings infinitesimal value with them.

Twitter isn't worth it.

Yeah I'm pretty sure the language that has birthed conventions like HasThisTypePatternTriedToSneakInSomeGenericOrParameterizedTypePatternMatchingStuffAnywhereVisitor and RefreshAuthorizationPolicyProtocolServerSideTranslatorPB are rife with great practices that are in no way obscured by layers upon layers upon layers of half-assed abstraction.

The one with System.ServiceModel.Install.Configuration.ServiceModelConfigurationSectionGroupCollection in it surely musts be awesome too; I've heard great things about it.

The footguns in a given language being more ornate and towering than in another doesn't make that language better, but the ability to produce resilient, maintainable solutions for a given problem space in it.

Ah yes, Sargon of Akkad, of "I wouldn't even rape you" fame.

If anything, I'm pretty glad the absolutely despicable thing is no longer funded through them and kinda makes me want to contribute more money to Patreon somehow.

I still remember when Clang bringing LLVM along was seen as SO OUT THERE and I'm just mentioning it because I find it weird to be old enough to see fads in system languages come and start to go.

Just curious, do you have any examples of this "limitations" you speak of? Sounds like a very interesting read.

Right, but the - operator requires prior knowledge that the search engine understands boolean operators and that a -b is an alias of "listings with a on their text that don't have b in their text too" whereas "a without b" is inmediately recognizable by whoever is writing the search as "I want something of kind A without property B"

While I'm sure this is A Hard Problem to solve by NLP I for whatever reason was under the impression that this is trivial to special-case.

As in, "X without Y" sounds like a common enough use case to have it's own little parser branch in places as big as Google or Amazon

Silkworms are killed in the production of silk whereas simply milking the goats would let a kind of continuous process happen. It would still need to be untangled and spun which is a pain, but that would hopefully make for a better industrial process than vapour cooking tons of insects, which is also icky.

Really well reasoned parting letter.

Hoping he'll fare better doing Reason instead. I've tried and haven't had much luck selling it to our local Powers That Be but I understand it's a bit of a nerdy, tough sale.

On a similar vein, my company has had a great experience with Epidemic Sound for their videos and random multimedia. You pay them monthly, and any music you use during your subscription is usable in that finished piece of yours forever.

As a provider, supporting old tech stacks sucks. They're clunky, have all kinds of warts and annoying workarounds for stuff that got improved in future versions.

As a consumer, being told my light bulbs won't work with the new fixture is a great reason to no longer work with that provider.

As a provider that knows this, I'd rather support the old tech stack right up to the point my ability to keep the lights on isn't at risk.

Nothing prevents you from chucking https://microsoft.github.io/monaco-editor/ on a random page tho. Is the value add the fact that there's a server component behind it?

What is Theia better for than Visual Studio code or Atom or any other of this new trend of build-a-bear IDEs? I like Eclipse and the Eclipse foundation (hey, they rocked the whole IDE game back then, and make a decent one nowadays too), but I cannot understand where this particular project sits.

If your config files contain anything that could not be expressed as an OS variable, that's a maintenance nightmare right there. Eventually some user somewhere is going to jam entire mini programs in there and then complain when his castle of cards implodes.

Consider, if possible, the chance that if your program needs a subprogram for configuring itself, then maybe a bootstrap event hook or some tap into the bootstrap process like a plugin or something is a better fit for what you are trying to do. Actual managed extension points instead of ad-hoc ones will make your program much more useful in the long run.

Oil shell is fascinating to me. I haven't had a chance to really use it other than for toying with it given my primary work is all done on Windows, but the development effort and the very well explained reasoning behind every little thing I find amazing.

Is it not though? By exploiting the conditions to evaluate to true == $CaseValue you're subverting the expectation that the choices all rely on a single variable, all the while breaking fallthrough and default.

Pretty cool!

One thing that would massively improve this is if they were written as singular standalone blocks instead of sparse collections of snippets; I'd like to be able to grab, say, "make an element draggable" and toss it on my codebase as an isolated behavior.

I don't think I get the point? It's even more convoluted than haml, which is already pretty well established, and the syntax is subtly different enough that I can see myself tripping repeatedly while trying to write this.

Is this an exercise? Is there an actual project somewhere doing it?

On this previous company we used to get a network message on every login explaining to us that since this was company hardware there was no such thing as an expectation of privacy.

They would install all kinds of stuff to monitor our computers, and continuously require explanation on why we installed this or that tool. It wasn't fun.

Been wondering about this for a while... How does one "graduate" a notebook to an actual program on a server? Is there an actual standard procedure for that?

I'm pretty sure that if your notebook is big enough to debug what's in it you'd be doing everyone a disservice keeping it contained like that.

Hi awb! I added a PR for a simple change making the inputs a bit more uniform. I really like this! Thanks for letting us all chip in.

We do, though.

Literally every other card in the deck is in the hands of the kind of people who will hoard toilet paper to sell it for 10 times its value then publicly complain when outrage mounts.

If you tried looking it up yourself instead of making me feed you info in what totally looks like bad faith that would be awesome.