AmpsterMan

PHP and Laravel are amazing.

As a novice Arch user, I never realized this is why I needed to update keys often

I get it now, but I have so much imposter syndrome that I wasn't sure if this was ACTUALLY something I needed to figure out -__-

It does. https://go.dev/blog/maps

What the poster was alluding to is that you usually prefer to deseialize to a struct rather than a record/dict/map

Going off of that framework:

Because doing three requires convincing a bunch of people that are currently doing number two, to do number one instead.

The market can stay silly longer than I can stay solvent

Nebula is such a streaming service. From what I understand, they are a subscription based company that has a profit share incentive for it's creators. Consequently, the creators skew toward educational-esque content.

The OP is right that in everyday talk state is not used in the general sense of "government"

My own tin foil hat theory is that "state" in that usage entered into common English use (in U.S.) because of foreign actors. Rush Limbaugh, et al. have been talking about "deep state" long before it entered common use around the 2020 election.

I think a lot of people dislike that JavaScript is a general purpose programming language, rather than being a scripting engine for browsers.

Htmx posits that current browsers aren't "truly" hypermedia since only anchor tags and forms can initiate GET/POST requests. It is more of a tech demo showing what client with ANY tag being able to do requests would look like.

That's why whether it is library/framework is besides the point. The author posits that these features should be in the spec, and tries as closely as possible to show what something might look like if we had it in the spec

while I understand the hesitation, there are many solutions that only make sense at scale.

Anectdotal: I got a raise after two years working for my current company. It's nice, to be sure, but it doesn't cover inflation according to the BLS inflation calculator.

Stroad is a word that has increasingly come into popular use and is well defined.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad

You can ignore new terms if you wish, but it is useful for describing a common street pattern in North America. The term is increasingly being used by urban planners.

I've spoken to my friends on how right-on-red is one of the most anti-pedestrian rules of the street that exist. It was like pulling nails trying to convince them that the added convenience for motorists is not worth the increased danger to pedestrians... I live in the city, they in the suburbs. It's not that they are uncaring (well, not directly) it is just that for many people, imagining a lifestyle different from theirs is very difficult.

I'm convinced that North America will only get its act together when gasoline reaches $9.00/gal. Only then will middle class folks start looking toward city living and only then will we get any appreciable progress in city life. I only hope that we reach that point BEFORE the climate catastrophe worsens beyond repair. The fracking boom doesn't have me very confident of this.

To whatever extent this article is true suggests that the way to convince people of certain positions is to hook them via peripheral route, but then keep them there via the central route.

If the position is such that any central route reasoning would lead to a rejection of the position, than the next best option is to overwhelm the critical faculties with peripheral route persuasion

I did this by mistake. Got hired as a QA, transferred to dev in six months. I wouldn't technically qualify for similar roles in my company were I to apply from the outside.

As we discuss this topic, can we keep a few things in mind?

Density does not mean Manhattan levels of density. Manhattan has 28,000/km^2, Atlanta has 3,500/km^2. That's an order of magnitude difference.

I mean this with all of the respect I can muster. If your first thought is "I prefer to live in a rural space where my nearest neighbor is half a kilometer away" Congratulations. You live in a RURAL place, this does not apply to you. In fact, you should be cheering for denser living spaces. It is not the five-over-ones that are taking over the precious rural landscapes, but the endless sea of concrete and asphalt that is suburban living.

To non-North Americans. The standard U.S. and Canada experience of "living" in a city, is you live in a quarter acre of land in a winding suburb where it's at least half a kilometer to get out of your neighborhood onto the local collector. It's going to take you at least another half kilometer to make it to the arterial that takes you to the giant box store that has a bunch of stuff you need.

It is impossible for a plurality of people in North America to get the basic necessities without a car, let alone any other niceties.

I love this comment because it is strongly hinted that Evrart Claire is the real deal and he likes to play the part of a corrupt Union boss

Wrong abstractions start off as right abstractions and slowly become wrong abstractions. What's the point in which a right abstractions becomes a wrong abstraction? Am I sure I can identify that point? Can someone else? Can someone else which has no knowledge of the original assumptions that were implied during the initial abstraction?

There are two kinds of abstractions in your, the ones everyone complains about and the ones that no one has ever seen.

My rule of thumb is thus: Have I repeated myself three times doing the EXACT same thing? Then CONSIDER abstracting away. Otherwise, make as many implicit dependencies explicit as possible and slightly keep repeating yourself until you are exactly repeating yourself

This "15-minute city" meme is the latest example of how conservative propaganda and misinformation make it around the world before the truth has even put on its shoes.

It's more that every substance has a specific heat capacity. That is, how much energy it takes to raise 1 g of that substance one degree Celsius.

Water happens to have some of the highest specific heat capacities. Therefore, the south can "store" more energy in the hot months, and release that same energy in the cool months better than the north can

I think the concern is that LLMs approximate that enough for decision makers to replace jobs. What critics see is a world where consumers and lower skilled workers get shafted in order for... what exactly?

Humans aren't horses, because horses don't participate in the wider economy, but it seems increasingly swaths of people are being laid to pasture, so to speak, effectively becoming horses.

They are metaphorically in disbelief, but in actuality they are not in disbelief? Yeah I guess I understand the climate deniers too.

EDIT: Be cause I wrote the above in anger

Scientists have been sounding the alarm for as long as I have lived. They have consistently used the most optimistic scenarios and we have constantly done worse than that. Climate Deniers want to deny because the reality is an inconvenience to their ways of life. The costs of climate denial are diffuse; they can't be directly traced back to me. The benefits are acute and wholly captured by me. Add on to this that contribution toward climate change is disproportionately done by wealthier people and you get the most powerful people, who benefit the most from climate denial, trying to get others to deny with them.

I'm planning on running Arch on the newer model so thanks for this writeup

I can think of two simple, practical answers to your query:

The expressive power of single value functions is very powerful and the constraint is not necessarily restrictive but may even drive a stronger analysis. (Where does this function have multiple returns? Is it for the whole domain? Etc)

By contrast the expressive power of negation and implication are relatively low given very intuitive and well defined alternatives exist.

Second, there already exist good enough paradigms for dealing with multi-valued functions. Splitting the function up into multiple functions, mapping to an ordered pair, etc.

Defining a function the traditional way is more than just notational convenience. The single value constraint allows for many simplifying assumptions, enough that is worth to pay the cost when dealing with relations that you want to talk about in functional ways

I think the larger "issue" is that the phrase colloquially means the exact opposite of the original observation, that a bad apple MEANS the bunch is spoiled. It's worse because this changing of the meaning is perpetuated by those same bad apples themselves.

"the proof is in the pudding" is a much more benign change. It's literally just a shortening, but no meaning is lost... if you want the proof, you'll find it in the pudding (implying you should try the pudding to verify your assumptions)

Scholarships also just possibly dried up after the great recession. My wife and I both graduated from same state with similar GPA, though I was 2010, she 2012. We qualified for the exact same scholarship. Mine covered 100% of my tuition, hers 75%.

That's exactly what they say in the beginning:

> First off, this is an observational study, not a randomized experiment. I think we may be reaching the limits of what analysis of observational data can do in the education debate and, given the importance and complexity of the questions, I don't understand why we aren't employing randomized trials to answer some of these questions once and for all.

I think the historical context is necessary. At the time, Rails was a thing and python was taking server space from Java, PHP, etc. They weren't looking to those languages as standards, but rather as languages that were likely to have similar problems.