There's that word we again. So you're the crazy gringo who always picks my pocket?
Deflation is only bad for people who hold a lot of debt. For people who are cash positive, deflation means you're richer, you're being paid more to do the same job, etc. all while maintaining your freedom. Deflation actually being good is the central gamble behind bitcoin's design. If more people understood that then they'd probably stop using it for such frivolous purposes. Not everyone is privileged enough to even hold debt, so it's really an exclusionary system. And what do the people who the system trusts to have debt (e.g. private equity firms) do with it? They do leveraged buyouts to rip out the heart and soul of responsible American companies. The only thing inflation is good for is keeping folks running on the hamster wheel and bankrolling entitlements.
This is such a pervasive issue with the relational SQL query model ! The fact that joins always create brand new tables is powerful, but it's rarely what is needed.
The example in this article can manage to do without a join because it's only using the other tables to filter the customer table. The proposed solution breaks down as soon as a column needs to be brought in from the other tables (for example, "the total number of products purchased from the Beauty category"). A notion as simple as "I want to return a list of customers with additional properties" does not map to any dedicated SQL construct ! You can JOIN then GROUP BY, but making sure that the result only has exactly one value per customer is not something you can explicitly say in your SQL, it's a consequence of how you set up your JOIN and GROUP BY keys, and it's both easy to make a mistake and hard to understand the intent.
Lessig is a bit of a crackpot. Extreme wealth, and the political power it bestows is so obvious and corrosive to the whole world. The capitalist system enslaves almost everyone on the planet, and Larry's out here theorizing about how we're going to live together on the internet.
Stupid people seem incapable of understanding how color-blind solutions are able to still address racial disparities.
If you were to, say, implement a program to help poor people, rather than "people of color," then to the extent that "people of color" are overrepresented among the poor, then so, too, would the solution disproportionately assist "people of color."
The benefits would be:
1.) we don't enter an infinite teeter totter of people arguing on behalf of the victimization of their identity groups
2.) we actually arrive at an equilibrium more rapidly
3.) we don't institutionalize the concept of race, and reinforce the idea that the color of your skin is a concept worthy of being categorized by
4.) we stop treating race as a proxy stand in for privilege, or competence (which is exactly what racists do), and instead target the direct thing that race was proxying
5.) by targeting the actual thing we're trying to remediate, we help all people affected by it, rather than limiting ourselves to the identity groups with the best PR. we also don't unnecessarily target people who belong to those identity groups and aren't actually in need of assistance, but are perceived to be simply by association through the color of their skin
Just to reiterate: assume 1/6 people in a city were "people of color." Assume that 4/6 people who were poor in the city were "people of color." If you add a policy to help the poor, without considering race at all, 4/6 of the people that you help are going to be "people of color," despite them only being 1/6 of the population. It automatically targets the people who are affected disproportionately...
Well, I wouldn't call it a "method"; it's just a combination of a fault tree with an event tree diagram for a given hazard; both of which are the result of a corresponding analysis. Bow-tie diagrams appear a lot in Eurocontrol documents and standards since twenty years (e.g. in their safety assessment method); also the FAA seems to use them.
> But blocking IO isn't one of those situations, so you can just use threads.
Threads and async are not mutually exclusive. If your system resources aren't heavily loaded, it doesn't matter, just choose the library you find most appropriate. But threads require more system overhead, and eventually adding more threads will reduce performance. So if it's critical to thoroughly maximize system resources, and your system cannot handle more threads, you need async (and threads).
In any folder, you put all your favorite One-liners for that folder into a file called “.ok”.
Then you can run them command with “ok 1” for the first command, or “ok 2” for the second command, etc. Use “ok” by itself to pretty-print all the available commands in that folder.
I started the project but my friend @doekeman took it waaay further than I ever dreamed.
It’s really helpful if you have a bunch of different projects that you work on, and need a way to remember all their different commands and incantations.
There’s a Powershell version too (ok-ps).
For there bit where I jump around from one project to another I use a system called markjump. It’s great too.
The fact that more people knit in the US than there are programmers is irrelevant though for the argument that most of "the people involved with knitting probably just aren't heavy internet users."
And it's conceivable that it's only a relatively small percentage of all practitioners who actually upload patterns.
> But I guess each one of us is a victim of a propaganda machine
I would say the enormous difference is that you are aware of it, while the vast majority of Americas are utterly clueless. In fact they often take extreme offence at the very mention their media contains propaganda.
I don’t understand this line of thinking. My father worked a minimum wage job most of his life and was able to retire a multi-millionaire simply because he saved and invested his disposable income. Most people can become wealthy but they choose to drive fancy cars and go to the movie theaters instead then complain how unlucky they are. That’s simply not true. If people are lucky because they realized wealth was attainable then yes, the most successful people are lucky.
Yes. And it may even be the best way to do it. For example, here's a paper where the authors come up with a schema and transpiler for doing a Gremlin-queryable graph DB in PostgreSQL, and find that it outperforms Neo4j and Titan:
Is that empirically true? The USA was the largest economy in the world by 1890, despite pursing a policy of isolationism for the entire century before that. By the time we entered the First World War, we accounted for a quarter of the world economy, about as much as all of Western Europe put together.
In this case the federated system is worldwide, and the individual phyles by definition must park and govern themselves within the federation's border. Because the federated system is worldwide, it must contain only a small subset of the laws we normally associate with a nation-state, those that directly affect peaceful trade and dispute resolution. Cultural values are left for the phyle to administer.
Another key difference is that your phyle follows you around, geographically, while your nation's jurisdiction ends at its borders. If I'm an American expat interacting with another American expat in Shanghai, I'm still subject to Chinese law. If I'm a Neo-Victorian (to use one of the phyles from Diamond Age) interacting with another Neo-Victorian in Hong Kong, I'm subject to Neo-Victorian law. A block over could be a Han Chinese (also using the Diamond Age phyle, but in this case it corresponds to a real ethnicity in our world) enclave, and its citizens would be subject to Han Chinese law when interacting with other Han Chinese. If, as a Neo-Victorian, I cross the street to do a business deal with a Han Chinese, our dealings are governed by the Common Economic Protocol, the set of laws common to the federated system as a whole.
I'm not that cynical. I find the whole concept of attributing malice as the primary motive of those whom I disagree with to be one of the most basic (and common) of political failures.
No, I think they actually believed what they were saying. They believed the rising tide lifts all boats, and none of them would get swamped.
Companies don't have constitutional rights nor obligations. If wrong, please correct me on this.
As it is private property, it is free to set its own rules, even if those rules impede on my free speech. If Facebook was a government, it could not make those rules as per first amendment.
You can still sue of course.
Look, I feel AI-powered surveillance is scary, and think China is going too far (perhaps showing us a glimpse of the future) in this. But where it is state-run surveillance in China, it is capitalist-run surveillance in the West. That Europe needs to step up and protect its inhabitants is a sign of what happens if you give companies free reign in handling (private) data: A big privacy mess.
Yeah, but that's part of the old patriarchal system where men make money and women stay at home. In this age of double incomes, it should be irrelevant. Still, some people cling to the old patriarchy.
> But wasn't the feature of making yourself a "brand page" and/or having "subscribers" (which don't count toward the 5,000 friend limit) supposed to mitigate this a bit?
If you have a page, Facebook wants to milk you, so they've got this weird algorithm that pushes your posts to only a small fraction of the page's followers, expecting you to start "promoting" them.
Basically they screwed "organic reach".
Oh, and about 3 days ago I created a second Facebook account with the purpose of connecting with software developers and my English-speaking friends (I'm Romanian). I did this thinking that I don't want to share semi-private pictures of family with strangers, or to spam my family and friends with programming stuff.
But only 24 hours later they've disabled my account because of "security concerns", without notice and now I'm waiting on their support to reply after I've sent them my picture for validation.
And another thing - the online parents group from my son's school is on WhatsApp. They tried a Facebook group, but the problem is that when important announcements happen, not all parents receive notifications, so they resorted to something that works.
>"Yes, and just as sometimes a pre-existing unaffiliated business signs up with a commercial franchise, sometimes a pre-existing unaffiliated jihad group would join al-Qaeda."
No you are completely wrong. This is exactly how you become part of Al Queda - you start an affiliate. This is not some grey area:
"As such, AQ’s dominant strategy since 2001 has been to encourage affiliate organizations to attack the West, sometimes with financial or operational support. [40] AQ gained affiliates post-9/11, as several groups either emerged or reoriented themselves to pledge allegiance to bin Laden. These groups included Al Qaeda in Yemen (AQY) (which later became Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP), Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), which have been among the most deadly AQ affiliates throughout the 2000s'
Warning: the linked article failed to suggest a Dutch Baby, a grave omission indeed. This recipe [0] is my goto, but I only use 2 tablespoons butter and cook for 20-25 minutes instead of the suggested 30-35 minutes (a burnt Dutch Baby is not Good Eats). Serve with cottage cheese, berries, and / or a good sausage. I like bison smokies, but that is just me.
Deflation is only bad for people who hold a lot of debt. For people who are cash positive, deflation means you're richer, you're being paid more to do the same job, etc. all while maintaining your freedom. Deflation actually being good is the central gamble behind bitcoin's design. If more people understood that then they'd probably stop using it for such frivolous purposes. Not everyone is privileged enough to even hold debt, so it's really an exclusionary system. And what do the people who the system trusts to have debt (e.g. private equity firms) do with it? They do leveraged buyouts to rip out the heart and soul of responsible American companies. The only thing inflation is good for is keeping folks running on the hamster wheel and bankrolling entitlements.