Tcepsa

I remember back in the day we used to do that the other way around ;-) That said, I do think it makes sense to have both physical and digital copies regardless of which one you buy!

I've been using i3wm for years and have recently started doing deeper dives into the sorts of things that you can do with what's either already installed or easy to add (e.g. rofi for input, conky for display) [edit to complete the thought:] I really love how flexible and relatively straightforward it is to script up simple applications that have a fairly significant impact on my "quality of life"!

I love it! Reminds me a bit of the protagonist of Aphyr's Verb-ing the Technical Interview series, with the parentheses of salt and bough of cloud pine and deep arcane knowledge.

Hmm,that could be--I've been doing this long enough that I've probably forgotten some of the things I struggled with. It feels like it would work to say, "Here's this graph of a sine curve, and what that means is if you take a value you want to find the sin of on the X axis, and trace upwards until you get to the line, and then over to the Y axis, that's the sin of that X value [draw a couple of examples] and if you have a bunch of X values that you want to calculate the sin of, you can put them in an array A and use A.map(sin) and the result will be a new array with the corresponding sin values [draw input array A with the same values as the Xs selected on the graph, A.map(sin), and a new array with the corresponding Y values as from the graph]"

Sure, it won't work for everyone, but I'm guessing (hoping?) that "functions as first class citizens" won't seem that weird to people who have never worked with a language where they weren't

I think in some ways functional programming is easier to understand conceptually; it's a closer match to how I think about things. Like if I want to transform an array, I don't think "I want to create a new, empty array and then loop over the first array and call a function on each value and put the result in the new array", I think "I want to run this function on all the values in this array" (same for filter, same for find...). Reduce is a bit trickier, perhaps, but if you start with the example of finding the sum of all the values in an array that probably lays a decently intuitive foundation for it as well.

So yeah, I don't consider myself a particularly math-y person, but I find functional programming to be a more straightforward and less fiddly way of going from a design in my head to something the computer can execute.

Oh, yes that makes more sense (I don't know whether it's correct or not, but it is far more plausible!)

That would violate the conservation of energy. Put simply: The energy that is released from those CH3 complexes has to be put back into them to make them be CH3 complexes again. Otherwise you could, for example, heat your house by burning the same bit of fuel over and over again (using some of the energy released by the combustion to recapture the carbon and rebind it to the hydrogen molecules and leaving the rest as heat to enjoy all through the winter). Alternately, you could generate a tremendous amount of electricity by the same method.

Sadly, thermodynamics says, "No."

Yes, I believe that's correct. If any of the services that you are opening/exposing in this way contain vulnerabilities, those could be exploited to gain unauthorized access to the hosting machine. Attackers could then use the compromised machine as a staging area to launch attacks against other systems on your home network.

Putting the hosted machine in a separate VLAN (like a guest network) can mitigate that, but it means you have to do that configuration correctly.

(I am not confident enough in my own abilities/knowledge with respect to these vulnerabilities to try it, and so it may turn out to be very straightforward. I hope to do something along those lines someday but so far the risk has outweighed the reward for me.)

I appreciate your sharing your perspective, but you've made a few comments that I find extremely overgeneralized that I'd like to respond to. But first, I'll begin like you did: As a publicly-schooled kid who considers myself damaged as a result, I'm choosing to homeschool my children in order to try to protect them from the worst of that.

I got bullied pretty relentlessly (the goods are odd... and an easy target) and what little solace I could find was in doing my academic best, and receiving recognition and accolades from my parents and teachers. Thus I have also ended up a people-pleaser.

> Homeschooling is the ultimate egotistical project of attempting to form a living, human child [...] into a mirror of one's self.

Certainly for some, but that is not our goal and I am trying to be very mindful and cautious of that pitfall. I am trying to give my children the tools and skills that they will need in order to live fulfilling lives (by which I mean, able to keep themselves housed and fed, and with whatever calling or vocation or work pleases them most. I suppose that does carry a bit of my own projection with it, that it would be difficult to find life fulfilling if one is starving or without reliable shelter, but I feel that such beliefs are shared by enough of our society that the kids would receive them if they were in school as well). Will I make mistakes? Certainly. Will we be able to maintain a good relationship? I dearly hope so, but time will tell. Do I think the odds of us achieving those goals are higher than if we forced them into a school? Yes, I do.

The kids are involved in a number of extracurricular activities (mostly physical activities like biking and swimming and dance, but likely robotics at some point sooner rather than later) many of which include a range of kids with varying ages, many (most?) of whom are not homeschooled. Why wouldn't this expose them to different cultures, and provide them with other sources of approval and validation (friends, teammates, coaches, other parents)? Hopefully it will, even as that means I have to quash my desire to discourage them from hanging out with people whose views I don't necessarily agree with--just as I would if they were in school.

Anyway, in closing, to me it seems like the challenge is more one of helping kids, especially neurodiverse ones, learn how to navigate a variety of social dynamics and to be strong, independent persons who have a sense of personal identity and the skills to share that with other people but also to defend their boundaries when pushed... and that neither public school nor homeschool are necessarily good or bad at that (or perhaps, given our respective experiences, that both are bad at it ~wry grin~)

I mostly do cookies, quick breads, and cakes, but I don't think I've ever used corn syrup in my baking (not even for frosting) and definitely not high fructose corn syrup!

Your other points seem sound, and are things that I would not be surprised to find in homemade cake (except maybe the lecithin; what use does a cake have for an emulsifier?)

Thank you for the clarification; that's a much more compelling argument, and I think I am inclined to agree. I believe, however, that that is not what Hickey is saying. He's not saying "previously you could pass null and it would throw an exception, and now you can pass null and it won't throw an exception". He's saying "Previously if you tried to pass null you'd get a compiler error, but then I figured out that the method as written can handle nulls, so I changed the type signature to allow null to be passed in without the compiler throwing an error about it. See the updated documentation to understand what it does if you pass in a null value."

This isn't a breaking change because up until that point any code that was written to use that method already wasn't passing null (because it couldn't, because it wouldn't compile). The method's behavior hasn't changed, just its type signature, and so for any of the arguments that the existing code might possibly pass to it, it will still handle all of those exactly the same as it would have before (because, again, the implementation did not change).

Therefore, it is not a breaking change.

I usually add one or more reset functions, and then I can customize whatever state I want to return to.

One of the big benefits of using functions is encapsulation: the idea that you (as the caller) do not need to understand how a function does what it does, you just need to know what it does (perhaps along with some performance guarantees so you know it’s not going to do e.g. an O(n^2) operation). Beyond that, I don’t want to care and should not generally have to care about what the function is doing. As long as I get out (including side effects) what I expect based on what I put in, the internal behavior of the function can change any which way and I would not consider that breaking, because my code—using that function—would still run just fine.

Ubuntu for work

Manjaro for personal

(Oh and some Raspbian but I hardly have had any time for that this year ^_^; )

At 27 I had not accomplished particularly much. I had one solid accomplishment under my belt from my first two years out of college and then bounced around for the next couple of years. I had just accepted a new position at a large, prestigious organization that did a wide range of work... and proceeded to spend the next four years or so muddling along. Doing fine work, but still not really a great fit. Got a Master's in CS during that time, learned some things about graphics programming and systems design and broadened my toolbox a bit... And then in 2012 I got an opportunity to work on a new project, in a different language, outside my group. It was a better fit, still not great but I got to meet new folks and start learning (finally, in my early 30s) to reach beyond the role I'd been given and develop a good reputation outside my group. Shortly after that I switched groups to the one that new project was primarily in. Within a year or two of that I was tapped for a prominent role on something of a long-shot project, and we were very successful, leading to expansion of the effort to other equipment and substantial additional funding. At roughly 34yo I was invited to be the Assistant Project Manager on both efforts to help share knowledge, tooling, and ensure they were leveraging common functionality effectively. This went great for a couple years, at which point I was asked to head up the UI team of another ambitious project that was just getting started. That also ended up being extremely successful and is still running today, but I have determined that that degree of management is too stressful and not very satisfying for me. I have stepped back from formal management positions and have pivoted to technical leadership and contributions.

Now, in my early 40s, I feel that I am finally starting to hit my stride!

Probably in the "zero[0] marginal cost to owner" sense. They already paid for them; that cost has been sunk. If they aren't using them (and while I don't have citations to back this is, I'm confident that the majority of privately owned bathrooms are sitting idle and unused at least half of the day) why not let someone else?

[0] Yes, okay, fine, the marginal cost is not truly, literally zero: there'll be a few cents for water, a little wear and tear on the equipment, a few squares of toilet paper, a couple squirts of soap, etc. However, most people do not track their budgets that closely anyway, so it would be lost in the noise.

An excellent example of the aphorism that "great artists steal"

Ah yes, the "Sir, this is a Wendy's" of HTTP response codes ^_^

My go-to for quick-but-slightly-involved calculations--I love having an HP-48 in my pocket! (and honestly, I appreciate the slightly-smaller form factor better than the original ;-) )

Got it, thanks for the correction!

Oof okay that's really good to know--thank you for the correction!!

I am not a lawyer, but I think Terms of Service only apply if you want to... continue receiving/using the service. So even if it the TOS does have a forced arbitration clause and OP takes FB to court instead, I believe that would just mean FB could then say "You broke the TOS so we're going to suspend your account" which they've already done and so there is no incentive for OP to abide by it unless they care/expect to be able to do further business with FB in the future.

(If someone with experience with these things can provide additional clarification or correction, I'd appreciate it!)

Perhaps it is my ignorance about the data-driven aspects of Deming's work, but it does not seem particularly paradoxical to me that one might achieve success in business by monitoring and measuring the heck out of things and then reacting accordingly. The trick, I suspect, is in knowing what "reacting accordingly" truly looks like for a given set of numbers. In particular, it sounds like he tried to be highly mindful of what was actually human controlled vs. what was due to a system. Deming's red bead demonstration [0] is an excellent example of how managers conflate the two; in it, he has a group of employees who are required to rigorously follow a strict procedure that is statistically going to have a particular rate of defects, and then proceeds to judge the employees by the defects that occurred during their execution of the procedure. That's an example of how you can do a great job of capturing the numbers and still fail to react accordingly. If your employees are being operationally rigorous and your defect rate is unacceptably high, no amount of reward or punishment to your employees will improve your defect rate (at least, not without inducing them to corrupt their operational rigor, which is presumed to be a defect in its own right). Rather, it is your operations themselves--the system--that must be adjusted!

It seems to me somewhat analogous to what we are seeing with Agile software development and the methodologies and metrics that have sprung up around it; the fundamental ideas seem sound, but their interpretation and implementation (the system put in place by which developers are expected to "do Agile") in many organizations has not managed to retain enough of the original spirit to convey the corresponding benefits.

[0] https://deming.org/lessons-from-the-red-bead-experiment-with...

I think that's an important point that too many people gloss over, and I want to emphasize it with an example. Let's say the cutoff between 10 and 12 percent brackets is at 10k. If you make 10k one year, you pay $1000 in taxes. If you make $10,001 the next year, you don't pay $1,200.12; you pay $1,000.12. 10% on the first 10k, and 12% on the single dollar that you earned in that bracket.

This is literally going to change my life! T_T

I got the impression that the reason the author chose JavaScript was not necessarily with the intention that people would go full-bore FP with it, but more as a way of "meeting people where they are"; JavaScript is widespread and many people are already familiar with it, so it's more likely that they can get up and running with the examples and start exploring the concepts more quickly than with, say, "Learn You A Haskell For Great Good" (where, at the very least, a lot of people would need to download and install the compiler).

And, if the author is successful, then the chances that you could one day be able to write JavaScript code in this fashion and expect it to be maintainable would increase!

TL;DR different modes of thermal transfer can transfer heat at different rates.

There are a couple factors at play that help it absorb heat faster: 1) Convection rather than radiation. As the hot gasses travel through they stove they are in contact with the mass and can transfer heat more directly to it, which then spreads through the mass via conduction. This is aided by... 2) Newton's Law of Heating and Cooling, which basically says "the greater the temperature difference, the faster the heat transfer". Since the gasses from the combustion are around 1000 degrees or higher (at least initially) they transfer heat much faster to the mass (several hundred degrees delta) than the mass transfers it to the room temperature air (one or two hundred degrees delta).

Similarly, much of the radiation of the hot inner mass is absorbed by other parts of the hot inner mass; only the parts near the outside actually radiate heat away from the mass.

I'm pretty sure parent wasn't talking about Nintendo's software tooling, they were talking about the machinery to assemble the hardware. From that angle, I suspect that Nintendo would not be able to simply order something off the shelf that would work with their existing assembly lines. There is no "just" when it comes to changing hardware in a system like the Switch--which is part of why you don't see a bunch of aftermarket upgrade kits.

Related, I invite you to review the comments and note how many are focused on the battery life of the Deck, and specifically on how short it is. Even if Nintendo could just upgrade to a faster CPU, that would bring increased power draw, which would lead to either shorter battery life or needing a bigger battery, at which point you are either at people complaining about your battery life or once again back to industrial design and retooling your assembly line.

Tldr: They can't just bump the price by $200, drop in a Threadripper, and call it a day.

That's because it is a broad spectrum source; it includes a lot of red, but it looks yellow/white because of all the other frequencies that are also present.

So if you need to be exposed to just red light it won't work well, but if the red light works regardless of the presence of other colors then the sun seems like it would be a fine source.

I work at a fairly large organization (>1000 employees) as something of a jack-of-all-trades-having-to-do-with-software-development. There are several different groups within this org pursuing a variety of projects, many of which involve software in some way (sometimes as their main thing, sometimes in support of their main thing). Over the last decade+ of working there I have managed to develop a positive enough reputation with a wide enough network that I can choose from a variety of interesting opportunities. Some are longer works that I support for years, some are shorter prototyping or POC efforts, and some are stepping in for a couple of days or weeks to bridge a gap, implement a specific feature, or address a particular issue.

I also get to act in a variety of roles, from developer to architect to reviewer/advisor to tech lead. I'm working to move away from formal leadership of people or projects (I seem to have a confounding inversely proportional relationship with Formal Responsibility: the more of it I have, the less I am able to accomplish) and this may ultimately have a negative impact on my career-total-compensation; the org has formal personnel and project management tracks but not really anything for ICs. However, it is having a very positive impact on both my productivity and my mental health. It is a relatively recent change, so we'll have to see what my raise looks like next year; maybe management will see my impact as an interconnected contributor as even greater than when I was a manager.

I am full-time remote with a pretty flexible schedule (attend all important meetings and get in my 80 hours every two weeks and it mostly doesn't matter if I'm writing code at 10AM or 10PM) and generally I get to work with whatever coding tools I prefer (need to get my Emacs-Jira integration MVP finished though, because Jira is a tremendous productivity sink for me and some of my projects use it)