I've seen on X that someone made a self driving car driven by Jev. I didn't check in details what it was about. I suppose you could give it some finite set of answers. Just wondering if someone tried it.
296 karma · joined June 28, 2022
GDPR is applicable on EU citizens, disregarding where they browse from. So either they have to track whether you're an EU citizen/EU visitor or they track EU visitors when browsing from outside of EU. This makes it not GDPR compliant.
The main issue is that your privacy policy is most likely not mentioning this third-party tracking because you were not even aware of it. Who is going to be responsible? Who is going to be fined for not mentioning this tracking in _your_ privacy policy? You. (Your company)
> Shipping them 20MB of javascript before we even render a form would be a ridiculous thing to do.
> I have seen teams waste person-months of effort wrangling React validation libraries.
> It is not acceptable to bounce users on old browsers, users with bad network connections, users using assistive technologies.
> Build a web application that works on a playstation portable on a 3G connection - if you do, it will work for all your users, and it will still work 30 years from now.
The other day I added a fix so that the website would work in a PS5. Before that I didn’t even know that PS5 has a browser.
You also don't have a gas station inside your apartment. Depending on which car you get, you could go charge it to charging station. I'm not saying this is instant process.
You're guessing a cipher key by guessing typed characters with the only information being number of packets sent and the time they were sent at. Good luck. :)
I'm baffled about this "security feature". Besides from this only being relevant to timing keystrokes during the SSH session, not while typing the SSH password, I really don't understand how can someone eavesdrop on this? They'd have to have access to the client or server shell (root?) in order to be able to get the keystrokes typing speed. I've also never heard of keystroke typing speed hacking/guessing keystrokes. The odds are very low IMO to get that right.
I'd be much more scared of someone literally watching me type on my computer, where you can see/record the keys being pressed.
Archaeologist.dev Made a Big Mistake
If guided by this morality column, Archaeologist should immediately stop using pretty-much anything they are using in their life. There's no company today that doesn't have their hands dirty. The life is a dance between choosing the least bad option, not radically cutting off any sight of "bad".
It's an interesting assumption that an expert team would build a better library. I'd change this question to: would an expert team build this library better?
> If I need to query a hash often, I tend to write a method, and the method then makes sure any input is either a string or a symbol for that given Hash.
This is terrible. This is the exact opposite of what Ruby is trying to achieve: developer happiness. You basically implement "symbol is a string" for hashes (aka HashWithIndifferentAccess).
> But it has. I still use "# frozen_string_literal: true", but if you omit it, the Strings are frozen by default.
This is not the case. If you omit "# frozen_string_literal: true", the strings are mutable, in all versions of Ruby, even in Ruby 4.0, which will be released on 25 Dec.
> But a Symbol is not a String. Not even an immutable String. I understand what you mean (and internally it may be that way already, actually), but it is not a String.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... Who cares? What's the difference it makes for you whether symbols and string are interchangeable? Show me one valid use-case where having symbols and strings being different (user[:name] vs user["name"], or attr_reader "name") is useful.
> Symbols aren’t interchangeable though.
user = { name: "Alice", age: 30 }
puts user[:name] # Alice
puts user["name"] # nil
It would be great if Ruby would finally have immutable strings by default and, at that point, it would be possible to make symbols be strings. This would prevent any such user[:name] vs user["name"] bugs while not breaking any other functionality. And also keeping the memory "optimized" by reusing a single immutable string.
The fact that you have many friends who confirm your bias of not being a dick...means exactly nothing. You have people telling you your words made them perceive your comment as being arrogant/blunt and your reply is: I'm successful open-source maintainer and have many friends who think I'm not arrogant and I only take critique from them. Have it your way. But in my eyes, you're being a dick. (Don't misinterpret this as my judgement of your engineering skills. I love Homebrew and it's an incredible feat. Congrats.)
I have an "on save" hook that runs ripper-tags on every file save. This keeps the definitions always up to date.
It's weird, and different and therefore a bit repulsive (at least to me it was) at first. But, once you learn it, it's so easy to read it and to understand what's going on.*
* Side-note: Sometimes variables or methods look the same as parenthesis () are optional. So, yes, there's more things that can look like magic or be interpreted in multiple ways, but more times than not, it helps to understand the code faster, because `clients` and `clients()` (variable or method) doesn't matter if all it does is "get clients" and you just need to assume what's stored/returned from that expression. Also "get clients" can be easily memoized in the method implementation so it gets as close as possible to being an actual variable.
They want to sell some RubyGems logs about corporations (not individuals) using RubyGems API, to...Ruby Central?
As André explained on his site, he was on-call at the time when they were removing him. He acted to protect the service by limiting access. No harmful actions done by him were ever discovered by Ruby Central. It's two entities fighting to remove the other. You can say Ruby Central was right, I can say André was right. But we do know that Ruby Central fired the first shot when they (could've been an actual hacker) removed literally everyone from RubyGems and Bundler projects.
When you left RubyGems and Bundler (let's call them "Projects") team, you handed over your authority to whoever was left and/or was added later. It doesn't matter in which order things happened. What matters is that Ruby Central _and the rest of the team_ were the stewards of Projects. The important part here being _and the rest of the team_. André had every right to keep being part of that team, and he was for a long time, together with many other team members, all of which were removed by "a representative from Ruby Central". What an inhuman way to remove someone from a Project. "Hire" someone to do the dirty job for you so you don't have to. The decisions in a team should be done by reaching a team consensus. Not by one actor. I believe it's for the better that André was removed from the team, but it shouldn't have been done like this. Ruby Central lost their trust in the eyes of many. They could've achieved the same goal in a much better way. How can I trust an organization with management of something if they failed to manage this whole situation? Claiming this is all in the name of security and then not even knowing how to properly remove access from someone. So much about security...