Threads for boh

  1. 4

    Great questions. Interestingly the answers of Guido Van Rossum are consistently the least interesting/insightful from the bunch.

    1. 1

      I got the feeling he was trolling the interviewer (see for example “most important skill” and “best programming/non-programming related book”). Perhaps he felt the questions were low effort, so the answers should be the same?

      1. 1

        I would hope that his answer about what makes some programmers better than others, “Genetic differet [sic] brain structure,” is not a serious answer. Still, it would fit with the general disappointment that I’ve felt when I’ve interacted with him. Personally, I think that he was serious with his replies, and he really is the kind of person he appears to be.

        As a musician, I think that having Philip Glass as a lone musical favorite is a red flag.

    1. 3

      Bah, I’m done. I mostly use qutebrowser (sweetspot, daily driver) / nyxt (noscript docbrowser) / “ungoogled-chromium” (in desperate situations) and I want to quit the web browser anyway, the interesting part of the internet is moving off the web more and more anyway.

      1. 2

        the interesting part of the internet is moving off the web more and more anyway.

        Could you elaborate, please? Are you talking about “the internet of things”?

        1. 2

          Probably non-WWW protocols like Gemini.

          1. 2

            I mean alternative protocols to http(s) and alternative ways to consume http(s) than a web browser.

            Nothing mature or dominant yet but I feel most of the interesting tech is heading in a different direction.

        1. 2

          There’s still definitely a market for the old casio watches (which are still readily on sale new).

          It’s a wonder they haven’t been updated to present technology. Sure it should be possible to have dramatically better battery life and accuracy?

          1. 3

            It’s a wonder they haven’t been updated to present technology. Sure it should be possible to have dramatically better battery life.

            You forgot the /sarcasm tag. The batteries of some of those old casio watches were probably installed when Steve Jobs announced the first iPhone.

            1. 1

              was it 10 or 7 years? Could be longer. If it ever needs replacement, that’d mean it could be improved.

              Re: accuracy, it DEFINITELY could be better. Same deal, if it ever needs adjustment, it’s not good enough.

              Seriously, got mine early 90s. Tech must have advanced.

              1. 1

                If you want good stand-alone quartz oscillator accuracy, you need to have a thermal compensated oscillator. Not many companies make these - I know of watches available from Citizen, Swatch Group (Omega) and Breitling. All these watches are in the $3,000+ range.

                1. 1

                  The TCXO themselves aren’t anywhere near that expensive.

                  1. 2

                    No, but the market isn’t there. For most people, 15s/month is perfectly acceptable.

                    Next level is disciplining via radio signals, Bluetooth low-energy, or GPS. These take care of stuff like dates and DST changes too!

                    High-accuracy quartz is a niche, so the total price is higher.

            2. 3

              Casio makes thousands of different watches. The one here (FW-91, “affectionately” known as the Terrorist’s Watch) is one of the cheapest you can get.

              It’s still an order of magnitude more accurate than any mechanical wristwatch, and IIRC the battery lasts for years.

              If you go up the price scale, Casio has watches that charge via light, and that discipline their quartz oscillators via radio signal, or via BT to your phone (itself a NTP client) or directly to GPS.

              1. 2

                I know, I own one from ages ago.

                (note: not a terrorist. But I heard, and did stop wearing it into airports)

            1. 6

              Disgusting work. And the security angle is pure BS. Its entire purpose is to deny us our computing freedom. To “protect” the code from us like we’re some adversary.

              This will only be used by scammers and those who now try to block right clicks with an alert()

              1. 6

                I don’t think this is about how to make your website more secure. This is a “hey, here’s shit evil people could do, you need to be aware of it” kind of thing.

                1. 5

                  Disgusting work.

                  I think this is great, assuming browser vendors are willing to fix it. @freddyb Do you know if firefox is vulnerable to this too?

                  1. 3

                    I think treating this sort of thing as a vulnerability that can be fixed is a losing battle.

                    1. 4

                      Why ? Browser vendors are already implementing pretty good js environment segregation for webextensions, I can’t imagine why they wouldn’t be able to do the same for debuggers.

                      1. 2

                        I think those issues can be treated as fixable, but I don’t think they will all be fixed. Most of the things in part 2 are about calling into site-code (e.g., overridden prototypes), which I consider possible. But some of the things posted here (and in part 1) are hard to resolve. Especially when they cause additional second-level side-effects like source map URLs, the layout shift that comes from enabling DevTools etc.

                        I’ll try to get a definite answer from the team though :)

                      2. 1

                        if that’s the case then it’s an admission of defeat

                  1. 1

                    Their server is overloaded.

                    Here is the archived (non-interactive) version: https://web.archive.org/web/20210829092736/https://blog.klipse.tech/golang/2021/08/29/blog-go.html

                    1. 2

                      That’s the main differentiator of Klipse: It’s client side => No scalabilty and stability issues!

                    1. 2

                      That’s what an “Epic” is for.

                      1. 4

                        No, I can’t agree. Epics are much larger bodies of work. What I’m saying is down to individual task, it’s better to go in pairs.

                        1. 2

                          Unless we are talking about pair-programming, two people are not going to work on the same thing, just two very related things, so you can create two related but separated subtasks for only one person each.

                          At work we create a lot of those (micro) epics

                          1. 2

                            Sure they will. They will talk, design, review, pair program, have some meetings when one person will be busy and come back to sync a little later and so on. They are going to have fun, learn from each other and do better job faster than a lone person would.

                            Or at least that’s the plan.

                        2. 1

                          Do you mean “epoch”?

                          1. 4

                            Jira speak for multiple stories on a single task

                        1. 2

                          So… a server-side rendered web app, only using SQLite instead of Postgres or MySQL.

                          The Matrix has been altered recently, it seems

                          1. 2

                            You might potentially be able to use the same trick against MySQL and PostgreSQL too - the idea here is shopping a packaged copy of your data to a stateless deployment environment, which works for any database that can run off a read-only filesystem.

                            Here’s a write-up from someone who got read-only Cloud Run working with a ClickHouse database: https://alexjreid.dev/posts/clickhouse-on-cloud-run/

                          1. 2

                            Look like a huge waste of time and money except for a few super fans

                            1. 5

                              I don’t understand why PyPA is trying so hard to make us believe pipenv would be the standard tool for Python packaging

                              I can answer that: because of the disgusting corruption of the PyPA. Yes, that’s really the reason.

                              At the time, they were all friends with Kenneth Reitz and adopted it because it. Reitz has even the nerve to admit it on an interview for the podcast “Talk Python to me”: “we did the due diligence to make it recommended, to work with those people… it is a political sphere and politics are involved so 🤷” he says, like a politician offering bribes would say. (https://talkpython.fm/episodes/show/208/packaging-making-the-most-of-pycon-and-more at 35:38)

                              Reitz was later caught trying to scam companies into giving him money for work done by a requests contributor (see https://archive.is/OA0F1) but the PyPA didn’t care. It seems that it really was business as usual.

                              1. 4

                                It’s very easy to make this sound sinister, of course, but the simple fact is that Python packaging is a relatively small world and everybody knows everybody. That doesn’t make it an evil “corrupt” cabal, it’s literally the same as any other niche open-source interest group – the people who show up and participate naturally gain influence just from the fact that they’re there and taking part (and a lot of alternative packaging tools, both some that utterly failed and some that enjoyed a bit of success, seemed to take it as their mission in life not to collaborate with anyone who’d worked on prior art, which, humans being social animals, certainly did dampen their chances of gaining influence with those folks).

                                And honestly, a few years back you could hardly open a thread on reddit or HN without seeing people giving themselves repetitive-stress injuries from how hard they were spamming for pipenv; it was perfectly reasonable to pick it as a recommendation for the use case it tries to handle. Today, of course, you can hardly open a thread without seeing people trip over themselves to spam for Poetry, and so if it were being done today I expect Poetry would probably have a good chance of being the one picked as the recommendation. But the only thing worse than no recommended tool is changing the recommended tool way too often; in a couple years, perhaps everyone will hate Poetry and be spamming something else!

                                1. 1

                                  The fact is, this is not about something subjective like art. The alternatives can be evaluated by objective measures eg: work with x, has y feature, etc. publish all the results and make a recommendation based on that (or even not!). but this wasn’t that.

                                  The library was new and the features were still just a promise. The only merit that has was its author. This was a favor and a betrayal to the community.

                              1. 32

                                derek-jones claimed that experiments on unwitting participants were acceptable because Nazis gained valuable data in murderous experiments. antt literally wrote “Gotta hand it to them” for killing fewer people in the Holocaust than big tobacco, whose critics were denounced as Nazi-like. Neither permitted a sarcastic, satirical, or other reading.

                                I’m sorry I wrote flippant ban messages, you’re entirely right that they’re not useful. I was shocked and horrified by the comments and I reach for black humor as stress relief in shitty situations. But me throwing up my hands at the awful absurdity of someone publicly going to bat for Nazis isn’t useful for setting site norms or conveying the seriousness of the situation.

                                I’m not OK with continuing to publish these comments praising Nazi atrocities or downplaying the Holocaust. They’re so repugnant that there’s no potential learning value like there could be when a comment crosses a line like “language Foo is bad” to “you, fan of language Foo are bad”.

                                As to leaving up other final messages before bans, I think only sockpuppet voting rings and the guy who posted about how bitcoin is like a handjob have gone from totally off my radar to banned in a single post. The overwhelming majority of bans, it’s someone who’s been getting heavily flagged over a period of time and had multiple DM conversations with a mod about what’s not acceptable. The last message before a ban isn’t special, it’s the last straw of a pattern of abuse that I try to explain in the ban message. I often revise these in IRC between me, @Irene, and the two chat mods, @355e3b and @aleph for clarity, but the final wording is always my responsibility. I haven’t gotten many questions asking for further explanation so it seems like this is going OK.

                                1. 6

                                  I think it’s important to note that there wasn’t exactly a pattern in comments by that user, that I saw–and frankly with you saying “Neither permitted a sarcastic, satirical, or other reading.” after trashing the source material none of us will ever know.

                                  I can think of several ways of stating some similar sentiment about that odious medical research, ranging from “Dr. Josef did nothing wrong” at one extreme all the way to “There is perhaps the tiniest comfort that the unjust and inhumane suffering inflicted on uninformed and unwilling participants was not completely in vain: post-war reactions to this experimentation started a massive shift in ethics for medical research and norms.” Without the source comment, there’s no way for us to know.

                                  Locking subthreads (or even just a “We’re not here to litigate the Holocaust, this is off-topic, stop or get banned.”) would probably be a better way of handling it in the future.

                                  1. 12

                                    Maybe I’m weird, but I’m of the opinion that we shouldn’t be waiting for someone to demonstrate they are a repeat offender in playing-down-the-holocaust for them to receive a ban.

                                    1. 3

                                      The question is all about intent IMO: did they intend to downplay the Holocaust, or did they phrase a point in a bad way? There’s even room for accidents: I’ve sometimes made posts where I accidentally omitted a word like “not” which means what I wrote was the exact opposite of what I wanted to say. My original reading of derek-jones’ comment was that they said Nazi experiments were unethical, although reading it again carefully they may have actually said it’s a good thing. Is that what they intended to say? I don’t know…

                                      In principle I agree with your point. I’ve kicked up fuss in the past about this sort of thing (I spent a lot of time trying to change that site, both publicly and less publicly, I ended up just deleting my account as it had no effect, literally worst site in SE network ever). In that case there was 0 doubt, but sometimes it’s not so clear what exactly was intended.

                                      That’s the problem I have from operating on a single data point. Perhaps it’s naïve to a degree, but I’d rather be a tad naïve than see a Nazi every time someone says something stupid. On the other hand, I’d also rather have the occasional overzealous ban that ever deal with anything even close of that fucking cesspool of Politics SE again where literal Nazis and other outright assholes were given 90 chances before getting a short ban after which the cycle all started over again.

                                      1. 1

                                        I appreciate your thoughts. I think we basically have a moral disagreement.

                                        The question is all about intent IMO

                                        Whereas I feel pretty strongly that it’s only a little bit about intent. A culture that assumes good faith in people that say borderline nazi stuff seems, at best, naive enough to unwittingly shift the Overton window in a direction that makes more room for it, and the annoying trolls that stuff it into tired faux-rational multi paragraph comments. I’m not interested in hanging out in that kind of space. It’s immature, good people leave, and it gets more trolly, childish, and reactionary over time.

                                        Perhaps it’s naïve to a degree, but I’d rather be a tad naïve than see a Nazi every time someone says something stupid.

                                        I know what’s you’re getting at. This reads as handwavy to me, so let’s be precise because it’s important not to distort what has actually taken place in favor of what’s happening in hypotheticalland. What actually occurred, if we’re talking about yesterday’s ban, was someone saying something to the effect of ‘gotta hand it to the nazis’ because they didn’t kill as many as the smoking industry.

                                        So the comment wasn’t only “something stupid”, but specifically invoked nazis being ‘not as bad as’ something else. Even if they’re true in some narrow sense of number of deaths or injuries, do they have to be a literal card carrying nazi to be a malignant asshole that invokes nazis-as-less-harmful-than and ought to leave?

                                        1. 6

                                          Or just a bad way of phrasing and not what they actually intended to say? Or maybe it wasn’t and they’ll be at a KKK rally this evening. It’s likely we’ll never know for certain. Either way, I’m not going to come to any sort of conclusion based on a single data point. I always find it a bit disturbing how casual these things are flung around. At this point anything is “hypotheticalland” because all we have is a short statement that, on the face of it, of course aren’t good, but not everything is always what it appears at first sight.

                                          (I apologize for the length of this post by the way; it’s really as short as I can make it while still accurately and clearly explain my views, at least, I hope it’s clear. It’s not something I can explain in three or four paragraphs; perhaps if I was a better writer, but unfortunately I am not.)

                                          In my experience it’s actually really easy to find these sort of things out: just talk to them. The innocent will reply with “oh, I’m so sorry, I didn’t intend it like that!” and all is fine and we can continue as we were. The actual Nazis will almost always double down. I’ve also had this happen with a friendly mod messages I sent years ago: “hey, I deleted that because it came off as insensitive and vaguely racist because [reasons], I appreciate that wasn’t your intention but please be a bit more careful in how you phrase it in the future, cheerio!” And I got a reply saying it absolutely was their intention followed by some long rambling racist screed trying to convince me that The Jew is actually running the show and that a Goyim like me shouldn’t be fooled, or … something. I didn’t bother to read it but thanks for clearing that up; hold on while I revisit my earlier decision to just send a warning and never speak to you again. That’s also what happened in that SE thread I linked, where the Nazi ass started referring to the Holocaust as an “alleged historical event” right in the public thread calling out his anti-Semitism and calling for him to be banned, which finally netted him his long-deserved ban.

                                          Crackpots in general just love to talk about their crackpottery to anyone who shows vague interest in it (of even to those that don’t); Nazis are rarely an exception.

                                          And to be clear: we absolutely shouldn’t tolerate these posts or people that consistently make them. They should be deleted and the users sent a message this wasn’t appropriate. No disagreement on that. A second similar offence after the warning can just result in a ban because at that point we’re past the point of “maybe it was just a stupid moment” and a pattern has been established (tangentially related previous post](https://lobste.rs/s/zp4ofg/lobster_burntsushi_has_left_site#c_xodjgg)). I don’t think there’s much risk of shifting the Overton window, and I also don’t think we have that much of a moral disagreement as I am absolutely not in favour in making Lobsters a space where Nazis are somehow tolerated; I have argued before we should ban known Nazis even if their on-site behaviour on Lobsters is unobjectionable. I also wouldn’t want to hang out in this kind of space, like you, and would leave as I did on the Politics SE site in spite of being one of the top users in the years I participated (a somewhat sad affair, as I really like the premise of the site, which is fairly unique AFAIK, and spent a lot of time trying to make it work).

                                          Do I have patience or “tolerance” for Nazis or anything vaguely in that direction? No, absolutely not, and I will spend active effort to address any such issues, as demonstrated. But at the same time I’m also hesitant to jump to conclusions; I don’t think any of that is “handwavy”, I’m careful with this exactly because I take it very serious. The more serious an allegation, the more careful I am. And “Nazi” is pretty darn serious as far as I’m concerned.


                                          Also, as an additional point, not everyone lives in the same context and culture; and not everyone has the same sensitivities.

                                          I lived in Cork, Ireland for a while. One of the houses in my street had a confederate battle-flag in their window. I thought this was just the oddest thing, why would anyone in Ireland have such a stupid thing? Are you so racist that you’re now fighting for the “states rights” to keep slaves of a country you don’t even live in?

                                          Then I realized it may actually be something entirely different. Cork is the “rebel city”, referring to a rebellion against the English in medieval times. It’s a common nickname and there’s loads of references to “rebel” in Cork. Maybe … it was just a matter of “Rebel city? Rebel flag!” and they didn’t really understand the full context? I think it’s likely. I used to watch the Dukes of Hazards on TV as a kid, and for a long time I thought that the confederate battle flag was just the logo for the “General Lee”, which seemed like a really odd name for a car, but whatever. Only much later sometime in my 20s did I realize that actually, this was the Confederate battle-flag, and that “General Lee” referred to General Robert E. Lee. Do’h! And after that it took me some more years to really understand the history of the US and the civil war and that the Confederacy was actually really bad. I absolutely could have said something insensitive, perhaps even “borderline nazi stuff” at this point, simply because I didn’t really know what I was talking about back then on account of not being from the US.

                                          I watched The Death of Stalin with my Indonesian girlfriend some time ago, which parodies the death of Stalin and ensuing rat race for the leadership. At some point mid-film she asked me “Stalin was the leader of Russia for a while right?” and “did he really kill that many people? Did that really happen?” She’s not stupid, far from it, but those kind of things are mostly just not a thing here. Similarly, I’ve talked to plenty of people (including her) who don’t really know all that much about Nazi Germany or Hitler. Hell, I know someone who named their son “Adolf”. I chocked in my drink at first, but then she explained that he’s named after her Dutch grandfather (Adolf was a common-ish name before that failed Austrian painter ruined the name together with an otherwise perfectly serviceable style of moustache). “Oh yeah, Adolf Hitler, he was this leader in Europe right?”

                                          Indonesia was occupied by the Dutch and Japanese, not the Germans. That’s what they learn about in history lessons. I didn’t get any history lessons about the Japanese in WW2 either, because for my country it wasn’t really a thing (other than leading to Indonesian independence, on which I did get quite a lot of on account of being Dutch and the colonial history).

                                          Every culture has their own sensitive topics. For a lot of us, it’s almost inconceivable that someone doesn’t know about the atrocious Nazi history and doesn’t consider them to be pretty much the epitome of evil. But if you go beyond the “western cultural bubble” then it quickly becomes a lot more murky. I’m not trying to make some cultural relativism point or say that we need to respect all sensitivities equally because then we would also have to ban anything “blasphemous” or in favour of gay rights, and of course we shouldn’t allow offensive stuff just because someone is from, say, Indonesia. I’m just saying that “borderline nazi stuff” and such may not always be what you think it means at face value.

                                          Whether any of this is applicable here: who knows. But this is another reason I tend to be careful.

                                          1. 3

                                            Whereas I feel pretty strongly that it’s only a little bit about intent.

                                            I don’t think this makes sense if one thinks about it for more than a second. Ignoring intent tends to make it easier to hurt people who make honest mistakes or borderline cases, and makes it harder to deal with clever bad actors who follow house rules…and that’s before we even get into deeper philosophical questions.

                                            A culture that assumes good faith in people that say borderline nazi stuff seems, at best, naive enough to unwittingly shift the Overton window in a direction that makes more room for it, and the annoying trolls that stuff it into tired faux-rational multi paragraph comments. I’m not interested in hanging out in that kind of space. It’s immature, good people leave, and it gets more trolly, childish, and reactionary over time.

                                            This exact same case can (and is) made for the takeover of spaces by “SJWs”, communists, and other radicals. It’s a valid critique that cuts both ways–and opening the Overton window is essential to have a functioning marketplace of ideas.

                                            What actually occurred, if we’re talking about yesterday’s ban, was someone saying something to the effect of ‘gotta hand it to the nazis’ because they didn’t kill as many as the smoking industry.

                                            You’ve done a bit of a bait-and-switch here…I was referring specifically to the @derek-jones case (even linking to their profile). You seem to be referring to the @antt case, which even a casual reading of the comments suggests was trending towards some weird off-topic behavior even if it they weren’t going to go all nazi (and who knows, the comment pattern suggested that might have been the case). I’ll also note that, with the WHO reporting 8 million deaths a year, @antt wasn’t factually incorrect–but the comment history signals intent, which under your professed view we must discount.

                                            Even if they’re true in some narrow sense of number of deaths or injuries, do they have to be a literal card carrying nazi to be a malignant asshole that invokes nazis-as-less-harmful-than and ought to leave

                                            It’s not some narrow sense–if you believe the WHO’s numbers and you believe the Holocaust numbers then yes, the cigarette industry is literally 10x worse than the Nazis. They’re probably even worse than that, given the number of Nazis-per-death versus the tobacco-executive-per-death–unless you want to make the argument, as some have and some will, that even a single life of the chosen people (here Jews, but others can and have made the argument for Muslims, Christians, Blacks, gays, , etc.) is unforgivable; that all deaths are equally incalculable losses; that deaths due to consumer choices are not the same as deaths due to murder; or whatever else.

                                            That’s prima facie a valid discussion to have–if you have even a slight philosophical bent–but it sucks the air out of the room and the normative ethics of taking human life isn’t something that Lobsters as a community either has space for or the tools to do without kicking up a lot of dust.

                                            Why work this example? @antt was correct in their observations, but again the inferred intent (based on multiple posts, at least one of which is still available to read) was being a nazi shithead, and we judge them on that.

                                            @derek-jones had one post which we can’t even refer to anymore, and didn’t seem to have any history of this behavior.

                                            I for one would prefer a community where we at least try to understand intent–going by surface-level signalling is woefully insufficient and unjust.

                                            1. 2

                                              That’s prima facie a valid discussion to have

                                              Maybe, but not on this site.

                                              1. 2

                                                Agreed, as evidenced by the rest of the sentence. :)

                                                1. 3

                                                  True, I misread the rest of the sentence. Sorry!

                                    2. 5

                                      Thank you. I believe that this is the kind of moderation we need.

                                      1. 4

                                        I’m sorry, the ban message wasn’t bad per se. My criticism to it was because without the context of the comment, I thought it was a generic pre-written reason

                                        1. 3

                                          In my eyes your reasoning and reactions were good. I imagine it’s tough continuously having to assess potentially bad contributions. Well done.

                                        1. 3

                                          Even after following the link I still don’t understand that reference, it sounds like is about not being a nazi apologist. In any case, I agree, is terrible wording for a reason.

                                          Also, the term “nazi” has been thrown very freely in the USA in the later years so is not clear what is referred to, aside from Adolf followers. White supremacist? Any other supremacists framework based on race/religion/country/etc? Trump supporters? Harry Potter fans?

                                          1. 8

                                            Generally, when people get banned with that ban-reason, they say some shit like “Gotta hand it to the Nazis. They were pretty good at X”. There is really no good reason to bring them up in the conversations we have here, and it only makes you look like a nazi-apologist asshat. They are nearly always in bad taste and mostly flame bait.

                                            The ban messages are not really a reference to that tweet as much as just a response to the shit the commenter said. There is nothing to analyze here. The user was just being an asshat.

                                            1. 9

                                              But the concern here is that we don’t necessarily know exactly what the comment said. You’re making an assumption about the comment that got the user banned, and although it’s a quite reasonable assumption (there are very few instances where bringing up Nazis on Lobsters is ever necessary or justifiable), there still should be a way to trace back the original text, even if for no other reason than to hold the mods accountable.

                                              EDIT: This isn’t related to the comment that you were replying to, this is just about the full discussion here. I disagree with the comment you replied to, in that I don’t think it’s particularly relevant what “Nazi” referred to in the comment, nor do I think discussing it is relevant to this discussion. But that’s not a valid argument against more transparent moderation IMO.

                                              1. 5

                                                Comments get removed all the time. Entire threads are pruned for being off topic and inciting flamewars. In those cases everyone’s comments are removed - “good” or “bad”.

                                                Again, no-one is banned for a single comment. They’re banned for being a net negative to the site.

                                                1. 4

                                                  Yep. I’ve had comments of mine removed for falling for off-topic-bait. It’s fine.

                                            2. 7

                                              Also, the term “nazi” has been thrown very freely in the USA in the later years so is not clear what is referred to, aside from Adolf followers. White supremacist? Any other supremacists framework based on race/religion/country/etc? Trump supporters? Harry Potter fans?

                                              It’s come to mean, more or less, “someone we don’t like”. It’s a less sophisticated version of calling someone “divisive” or their behaviour “inappropriate”.

                                              It also creates a very real problem, in that actual NAZIs are still a thing, and it makes it harder to call them out.

                                              As Kirsten Dipietra (and many others) put it:

                                              Referring to Trump as a Nazi not only undermines any legitimate argument against the president, but distracts from the actual concerns of neo-Nazis and their recent prominence.

                                              I might be wrong but I suspect that the term neo-Nazi is only really useful if you’ve already burned out the term Nazi by applying it to all and sundry.

                                              1. 4

                                                This is how I once got embroiled in a discussion about whether or not the literal leader of The American Nazi Party was a Nazi or not (question for context).

                                              2. 9

                                                It’s a great system. Everybody calls everybody else nazis constantly, and then whoever is in power in the end can simply say “Dave over here compared car park attendants to nazis, which is now anti-semitic, hence making him a nazi, and banned”

                                              1. 9

                                                The whole blog is dedicated to bashing Proctorio, how weird

                                                1. 17

                                                  Eh. It claims to be about “exam spyware analysis” and bashes the similarly named ProctorTrack too. I don’t find it too weird; if I were forced to use such software, I would probably inspect it and might go so far as to write a blog complaining about it, if reporting the problems I saw in other ways brought no joy.

                                                  1. 9

                                                    I am forced to use Moodle when I teach and I have definitely considered launching a novelty Twitter account just to bash the software. Not so much because I think it would matter, but because doing so might be cathartic… :-)

                                                    1. 4

                                                      And Moodle while clumsy to death is one of the less bad of the bunch by my small experience.

                                                    2. 2

                                                      How’s that weird?

                                                      1. 4

                                                        He (or she) created a blog just for bashing a single company. Even the domain is “proctor.ninja”. Maybe they are an employee, maybe they thinks Proctorio is the worst evil, and maybe it is, but they definetly has a grudge.

                                                        1. 10

                                                          Proctor io has a history of suing experts who critique their shady practices. I would probably attempt to remain incognito if I was making these claims as well

                                                      2. 1

                                                        There was an entire blog dedicated to how xkcd sucks. It seems like there are … several now. The original (with the hyphen) was hilarious.

                                                        There’s also an entire mastodon instance dedicated to SalesForce fandom .. or at least it seems at first. It’s difficult to tell if they’re really fans, making fun of it ironically or a little of both.

                                                        1. 1

                                                          Wait until you find out about https://twitter.com/memenetes. They even sell merch about bashing Kubernetes! XD

                                                        1. 1

                                                          The current activities overview is the major reason I use GNOME. I must say I am skeptical to these changes. Hopefully Gnome Tweaks lets me use the old key combinations and have vertically scrolling workspaces.

                                                          1. 2

                                                            If not you can always use KDE and tweak its activities overview as you like

                                                            1. 1

                                                              I’m still super sad that RedHat and Canonical chose Gnome, and I wish I could have been a fly on the wall when those discussions happened.

                                                              Bet you dollars for donuts they were scared away by Qt’s licensing.

                                                              Meanwhile I’m running Kubuntu 21.04 on my laptop and it runs like a champ and has the accessibility features I need. Yay KDE!

                                                          1. 5
                                                            for message in messages:
                                                                ban_account(message.sender)
                                                            

                                                            Fixed!

                                                            1. 1

                                                              To explain me better, I think the problem is not using integer ids, but rather, using integer ids with languages that make you creating an index to iterate a collection.

                                                            1. 2

                                                              Indeed, using not() is the best solution in most cases: succinct and expresses explictly what the original intent is.

                                                              The only issue is that, as of 2021-03, not() is not yet supported by all “minor but not totally irrelevant” browsers. In particular, it is not supported by IE11 and Samsung Internet. [1]

                                                              [1] https://caniuse.com/css-not-sel-list

                                                              1. 10

                                                                I think what you’re looking for is this: https://caniuse.com/mdn-css_selectors_not

                                                                Got suspicious when I noticed chrome only supported that since January of this year, turns out that’s for having multiple selectors inside a single :not (like :not(.a,.b,.c) instead of :not(a):not(b):not(c)). The one you probably want is supported by all browsers in that list that aren’t extremely outdated (even IE 9 supports it!)

                                                                1. 4

                                                                  To put some color on that: Not even Microsoft supports IE11, and “Samsung Internet” is supposed to be based on chromium, so if it doesn’t support a ten year old feature, that either means they removed something useful or have cut before :not was introduced so I think you’re doing those poor bastards a favor by not supporting their bad lifestyle decisions, and I hesitate to even consider what other problems those users have.

                                                                  1. 8

                                                                    Two clarifications:

                                                                    1. All browsers support CSS3 :not().

                                                                    Practically any browser out there has basic support for CSS3 :not(): https://caniuse.com/css-sel3. https://caniuse.com/css-not-sel-list is about support for full fledged CSS4 :not().

                                                                    2. Yes, these are minority browsers, but ~15% of the global users. The most disadvantaged 15%.

                                                                    Agreed that these are minority browsers. Unless you are targeting the whole world population (like Facebook or Twitter do) one should not care too much about them.

                                                                    My only concern is that these minority browsers still account for ~15% of the global Web users (says caniuse). From my experience, these users are the most disadvantaged, and often not in a position of control: library patrons, people stuck with older mobile phones, employers in budget-tight SMEs. The kind of users that will not make you rich, but that somehow I feel obliged to support on ethical grounds.

                                                                    That said, most of the times there are CSS polyfills that one can use to support such outdated browsers, so practically speaking, this is not a big issue.

                                                                    1. 9

                                                                      More javascript so it looks a little prettier? No, that’s the opposite of what we should do with those bottom-of-the-barrel browsers with underpowered CPUs and low resolution screens.

                                                                      The best way to support their users is to give them usable server-side rendered HTML. They will not care is everything doesn’t look pixel-perfect, but they will care if they have to wait a minute or two just to read some text because you are using React for a static page.

                                                                1. 1

                                                                  This is just a guide on how to write idiomatic functional programming.

                                                                  1. 1

                                                                    Am I missing something or this only works in/with Ruby on Rails?!

                                                                      1. 2

                                                                        The example is Ruby on Rails, their frameworks are written in TypeScript though so they could work for other setups.

                                                                        1. 2

                                                                          It only requires a header and HTML tags. You can even do it manually without much effort, the libraries are only lightweight helpers. AFAIK there are already libraries for Django and Laravel, in addition to the original Rails gem

                                                                        1. 1

                                                                          I admit I’m a bit of a dilettante here, in that I only used ORMs for like 2 large projects, the scope of my work didn’t ever intersect their use-case.

                                                                          But might it not be worth giving a few more details here (other than slapping “active record”, that is) as to what differentiates this from other python ORMs?

                                                                          Since the space is so crowded and 99% of people using them are probably familiar with at least one of the biggest 2 or 3 libraries, a comparison would help a lot in explaining why one should actually want to use this.

                                                                          1. 1

                                                                            I agree, it needs a comparision with their two biggest competitors: the Django ORM and SQLAlchemy. Django also uses the Active Record pattern, while SQLAlchemy follows the Data Mapper… but there are so many other details that go beyond that.

                                                                          1. 2

                                                                            For a “Staff” software engineer, this book should be on their reading list: https://www.amazon.com/Developer-Hegemony-Erik-Dietrich/dp/0692866809

                                                                            Not a book about programming, but about the corporate system they are part of.