My son (6 at the time) and I built this set a few years ago, using the LEGO app on his tablet for the instructions. After completing it, we were asked to do a survey about the set… Sure why not.
I finally solved this problem in my desktop by having two separate M2 drives, one for Windows and one for Linux. Boot & grub live on the Linux drive and Windows never touches it.
With Linux and Windows on one drive, this is super annoying.
Ha, I recently upgraded to an nvme drive from SATA, cloned the drive and then realised I need to move the windows partition all the way to the end to let me expand the Linux partition. Which broke windows. After about 2-3 hours of troubleshooting it was working again. It was around then I realised I hadn’t booted into windows in 2 years!
You have another slot most likely, it’s just populated by the Wifi card, If you’re willing to sacrifice that and use one of those tiny USB wifi adapters you can use that as your second slot with a little adapter to convert between E key to M key. Also have to use a 2230 SSD since the longer ones won’t fit in the spot.
iirc this was a major concern for face transplants. Person A gets horribly burned; person B dies; A gets B’s face; B’s mom sees A walking around with B’s face and has an existential crisis.
I mean, animals (birds too) def have grieving rituals (“funerals”) and emotional suffering caused by loss of a close one.
Seeing a reanimated corpse of that same individual would fuck beyond uncanny-valley anyone.
And even without knowing the individual prior to assimilation, there is no way birds don’t recognise it as something different.
It just isn’t physically harming them & won’t go away - what are they supposed to do?
Most of the abstractions, frameworks, “bloats”, etc. are there to make development easier and therefore cheaper, but to run such software you need a more and more expensive hardware. In a way it is just pushing some of the development costs onto a consumer.
Most of the abstractions, frameworks, “bloats”, etc. are there to make development easier and therefore cheaper
That’s true to an extent. But I’ve been on the back side of this kind of development, and the frameworks can quickly become their own arcane esoteric beasts. One guy implements the “quick and easy” framework (with 16 gb of bloat) and then fucks off to do other things without letting anyone else know how to best use it. Then half-dozen coders that come in behind have no idea how to do anything and end up making these bizarre hacks and spaghetti code patches to do what the framework was already doing, but slower and worse.
The end result is a program that needs top of the line hardware to execute an oversized pile of javascripts.
If the software is much more expensive to develop, most is it just won’t exist at all. You can get the same effect by just not using software you feel is bloated.
That isn’t a generational thing it’s an urban/rural thing. A 5 year old from a farming community would know what that is. Also, if you fill them with concrete, you got yourself a hillbilly skeleton key.
Honestly, after having served on a Very Large Project with Mypy everywhere, I can categorically say that I hate it. Types are great, type checking is great, but applying it to a language designed without types in mind is a recipe for pain.
I wholeheartedly agree. The ability to describe (in code) and validate all data, from config files to each and every message being exchanged is invaluable.
I’m actively looking for alternatives in other languages now.
You’re just describing parsing in statically-typed languages, to be honest. Adding all of this stuff to Python is just (poorly) reinventing the wheel.
Python’s a great language for writing small scripts (one of my favorite for the task, in fact), but it’s not really suitable for serious, large scale production usage.
I’m not talking about type checking, I’m talking about data validation using pydantic. I just consider mypy / pyright etc. another linting step, that’s not even remotely interesting.
In an environment where a lot of data is being exchanged by various sources, it really has become quite valuable. Give it a try if you haven’t.
I understand what you’re saying—I’m saying that data validation is precisely the purpose of parsers (or deserialization) in statically-typed languages. Type-checking is data validation, and parsing is the process of turning untyped, unvalidated data into typed, validated data. And, what’s more, is that you can often get this functionality for free without having to write any code other than your type (if the validation is simple enough, anyway). Pydantic exists to solve a problem of Python’s own making and to reproduce what’s standard in statically-typed languages.
In the case of config files, it’s even possible to do this at compile time, depending on the language. Or in other words, you can statically guarantee that a config file exists at a particular location and deserialize it/validate it into a native data structure all without ever running your actual program. At my day job, all of our app’s configuration lives in Dhall files which get imported and validated into our codebase as a compile-time step, meaning that misconfiguration is a compiler error.
I am aware of what you are saying, however, I do not agree with your conclusions. Just for the sake of providing context for our discussion, I wrote plenty of code in statically typed languages, starting in a professional capacity some 33 years ago when switching from pure TASM to AT&T C++ 2, so there is no need to convince me of the benefits :)
That being said, I think we’re talking about different use cases here. When I’m talking configuration, I’m talking runtime settings provided by a customer, or service tech in the field - that hardly maps to a compiler error as you mentioned. It’s also better (more flexible / higher abstraction) than simply checking a JSON schema, and I’m personally encountering multiple new, custom JSON documents every week where it has proven to be a real timesaver.
I also do not believe that all data validation can be boiled down to simple type checking - libraries like pydantic handle complex validation cases with interdependencies between attributes, initialization order, and fields that need to be checked by a finite automaton, regex or even custom code. Sure, you can graft that on after the fact, but what the library does is provide a standardized way of handling these cases with (IMHO) minimal clutter. I know you basically made that point, but the example you gave is oversimplified - at least in what I do, I rarely encounter data that can be properly validated by simple type checking. If business logic and domain knowledge has to be part of the validation, I can save a ton of boilerplate code by writing my validations using pydantic.
Type annotations are a completely orthogonal case and I’ll be the first to admit that Python’s type situation is not ideal.
Gradual typing isn’t reinventing the wheel, it’s a new paradigm. Statically typed code is easier to write and harder to debug. Dynamically typed code is harder to debug, but easier to write. With gradual typing, the idea is that you can first write dynamic code (easier to write), and then – wait for it – GRADUALLY turn it into static code by adding type hints (easier to debug). It separates the typing away from the writing, meaning that the programmer doesn’t have to multitask as much. If you know what you’re doing, mypy really does let you eat your cake and keep it too.
Edit: I just clicked the link. Damn, man. Two people’s lives destroyed in an instant. How hard does this eyebrow dude hit? Is he a professional boxer or something?
Some drunk dude wanted to fight me at a nightclub once so I went outside to smoke a cigarette and give him some space. He followed me outside and swung on me. I just dodged his drunk-ass hook, and he spun himself all the way around, lost his balance, and fell. When he fell his head hit a brick planter, and the sound it made was disturbing. I do not think he was okay. But I didn’t stick around to find out. I didn’t even touch him, so I just went back inside. I saw an ambulance out there some time later, and I’m assuming it was for Mr. Drunk boxer guy. He kicked his own ass.
Darnold told deputies that he walked into the convenience store and bought cigarettes. When he walked out, Aryafar asked him for a “smoke.” Darnold offered him a cigarette, but Aryafar allegedly wanted weed.
When he said he didn’t have any to sell, the two said expletives to one another and moved on.
Moments later, Amir allegedly walked toward the car Dardnold was in. He got out of the vehicle, punched Aryafar once, which knocked him down, and then got back in the car with his girlfriend and drove off.
That story of Dar(d)nold and Ayafar has somehow more typos than the shitpost. At least it isn’t AI.
This is an example of it going poorly but advertisers to an extent do it on purpose. Kool-aid gets used to refer to powdered drink mixes like band-aid is used to refer to adhesive bandages and, in some regions, coke is used to refer to soda in general. The idea is to become so associated with the concept as to overshadow the competition.
At the same time, lawyers also fight the phenomenon because if your product name becomes the concept itself it loses all trademark enforcement. There’s a chart posted on this site somewhere that shows words losing trademark status because of court rulings, but I guess I didn’t save it. The term is “genericized trademark”.
“While initially gleeful at the imminent damage to his competitor’s brand, Kool-Aid Man would soon be confronted with the irony inherent in his own vast advantage in consumer mind-share.”
Fun at partys guy: While the car will actually experience a force torwards the magnet, so will the magnet experience an equal amount of force torwards tha car. Given the connection between the car and the magnet is stiff, these opposing forces will stress the connection and create a reactive force in there according to Newtens 3rd law, ultimatly canseling the forces out and neither the car nor the magnet will move.
If you however remove the stiff connection, the car and the magnet will move torwards each other untill they meet.
How about if you launch a huge magnet well above escape velocity and remotely anchor a space elevator made from a ferromagnetic material to it but the space elevator’s weight counteracts its inertia exactly and holds it in place perpetually. Would that work?
Edit: I swear I’m not dumb, I just didn’t think this one through.
lemmy.world
Top