array_key_first

I haven't, actually, practically my entire family smokes. But it's very different these days. The amount of second hand smoke I'm exposed to is still, realistically, thousands of not millions of times less than that that the average person would be exposed to a few decades ago. Because there's less smoking in general, and of the smoking left it's done outside.

It makes sense when you consider those millions of other voters are apathetic by definition. They can be implicitly flipped like that because they, supposedly, don't care at all. If they did care then they would vote and then wouldn't be subject to that. And that is why it is vital to be extremely careful with apathy, in all aspects of life. Because apathy is a choice.

Didn't that actually happen with railroads? Like, there was a railroad bubble and lots of people lost a lot of money?

It happened with the Internet, too, and the Internet is pretty useful I think.

I'm sure leadership in Ukraine was aware of an impeding war, but naturally that's not the type of thing you're gonna tell your citizens. It doesn't help anything; it would only cause panic, migration, and resource hoarding.

Most companies are showing high revenue and profit and still laying off huge segments of their workforce. Largely due to the stock market - a lot of non-AI players are facing lowering stock price.

> realclimatescience.com

This is one of the stupidest websites I've ever seen.

People have been getting flu shots yearly for decades at this point. There's this weird delusion or socially-induced amnesia that comes with COVID.

I got COVID maybe a year ago, and I stayed home from work for a week. One of my friends couldn't believe it. He said "wow you're really gonna stay home for an entire week just because you have COVID?"

Uh... yes? Isn't that how we have always done things? If you're sick, you don't go to work because you'll get others sick. I recall being a kid and getting strep and flu many times and yup - the school nurse would send me home.

But something about the political environment around COVID has caused people to refuse to believe things that they know to be true. It's fascinating.

Of course second hand smoke causes disease - we know that. But you have to consider the context in which we attacked that. The second hand smoke they're referring to is nearly constant smoking indoors, which was standard in the past.

Smoking blowing smoke in your face once is one time and outside. It's easily millions of times less smoke exposure than what you're referring to here.

I think if you want to modify your car that's great, you should be able to do literally whatever you want... so long as it's still safe to the people around you. Rolling coal is not. I think thats very reasonable.

Cops are worthless but, more importantly, they have huge leverage. They can just stop policing at any time as a form of protest, and departments regularly do that. The system needs fundamental reform.

I have had people tell me to my face that they try to run cyclists off the road. You know, just casual attempted murder.

That's what people have told me. You are seriously underestimating how much some people hate cyclists.

Blowing smoke in someone's face is very little smoke in practice, because air is a thing. Also, realistically, you're not getting cancer from someone blowing smoke in your face.

Smokers get cancer because they smoke tens of thousands of cigarettes. You won't get cancer because you kind of smoked .1 cigarettes. Also, the majority of lifetime smokers don't even get lung cancer.

I don't understand how desiring less air pollution and safer vehicles is draconian. Driving is a big responsibility; it's one of the primary causes of death for Americans and it's one of the primary causes of poor air quality.

The reason we don't view it with the gravity it deserves is because driving is required. For most people, the options are drive or be homeless.

It's highly team dependent. Shortly, the more "coding monkey" the work is, the more velocity you can get with AI. As soon as you need to interface with customers and extract requirements, that becomes the bottleneck.

The reason these tools feel so powerful for hobbiests and individuals is the same reason that "two dudes in a garage" regularly overthrew huge software companies in the past: you set the requirements, and you have the autonomy to make whatever product you want.

In a corporate setting this isn't the case, and realistically writing code is not the bottleneck there.

Those 10,000 names are already written, though.

Tailwind doesn't solve technical problems really, it solves social ones. In a perfect world we all write vanilla CSS. But, in my experience, it becomes extremely messy and hard to reason about in huge codebases with lots of developers. Which sucks but isn't surprising to me.

There are legitimate problems with using CSS, especially in a large team setting. I think we all have experience with append-only stylesheets. That's what tailwind addresses.

Tailwind violates DRY but DRY is also not a hard and fast rule. The danger with DRY is that it can force you to build abstraction towers that are difficult to reason about, especially in a static context. And that's where we see the power of Tailwind: I can look at any element and immediately see it's styling. The same is not true with classic CSS, which is additional cognitive load.

Also, DRY can still be somewhat achieved with tailwind by using reusable components, in whatever framework you're using. It could be React, but it could even be blade components in a traditional SSR Laravel app.

Cameras and technology don't put people in prison at all, law enforcement and prosecutors do. And, well, do they? Do we know if these cameras actually help? I don't think we do. I don't think anyone is studying this.

They did win for a while because they stamped out 99% of piracy. In the early days of streaming it was legitimately difficult to argue for piracy. Streaming was just too convenient and too cheap.

But, they are greedy above all else. And so, we are once again seeing a resurgence of piracy. Large corporations seem to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

The decision was undisputably made with racist intentions, and anybody not willing to acknowledge that is not a reliable narrator and isn't worth arguing with. It would be like me trying to argue with someone in a mental institution - it's just not worth it, neither of us will gain anything from it.

I also didn't say everybody at the DEA is racist. You said that, based off of I guess you profiling me as some radical. I'm not, I understand that the DEA is an organization.

But what some people don't acknowledge is there are two types of racism in America: individual racism, and systemic or institional racism. You don't have to say these n-word to be racist. Most of our institutions are structured and designed in such a way to be racist. The DEA is structurally racist, and so is ICE.

It's not some "victimhood fantasy", you're just uneducated on it. But it's real and the rabbit hole goes very deep, I recommend some research on these topics. And, for the record, I'm white, I'm just not blind.

We live in a civilized society, the default is not hitting people and you won't convince me otherwise. Again, I don't want to hear some pussy-footing bullshit, so if that's all you have then stop commenting.

Sorry, I mean for some users who can barely use computers as it is, so mostly the elderly. For us obviously it's not too complex. But for some, it is, and it's also largely overkill because some groups don't want to run software anyway. They just need a file browser and web browser.

> Why does VS need to establish outbound requests to any domain, without authorization?

I don't know but it's very standard practice in most applications, because telemetry. But VS code is one of the worst: just check open snitch when running VS code, it's constantly phoning to a bunch of IPs.

I'm sure their contract explicitly states that their account can be suspended or terminated immediately without prior notice upon violating some TOS. And, most TOS are incredibly wide and vague, it wouldn't necessarily be hard to find something they violated.

This is sort of the problem with these new-age internet companies. The contracts are incredibly hostile. Most TOS you see amount to "you have no rights and we can fuck you up the ass"

Google is a B2C company so I'm sure some of that culture transfers over to B2B relations, but I'm speculating. Maybe the contracts are more normal for B2B.

I don't think you're typically told why for these things, and it's mostly automated from what I can tell. The automated systems make mistakes but more importantly they're completely opaque. Nobody, not even Google, knows how they work exactly.

There's a big mistake in this logic: is work really not getting done?

Because a lot of work has to be done regardless of if you have the money or time to do it. Most government work is actually not optional, there are literal laws saying it has to be done.

And that's what we, very predictably, saw with DOGE.

Like, think about it. You fire say 50% of people. What happens to the other 50%? They twiddle their thumbs?

You've worked a job before, right? And you've had coworkers fired or laid off before, right? Okay, what happens to their work?

Does it disappear into the abyss or do you then take it on? Because in all my experience, I take it on. Come on now.

Theres a natural tension here, because in order for this to be true you need a diverse market with many competitors. But that is bad usually, because it's extremely inefficient, so it gets optimized out. The monopolies we see are indeed an optimization - the natural climax of a developing market.

Consider payments: you do not want to carry around 100 different cards and trinkets just to pay for things in your daily life, right? And for merchants, they do not want to make deals with 100 different companies to accept payments, right? So what's the end result?

We see the monopolies in the US economy because our economy is very efficient. It could be even more efficient - consider, for example, how much time and money could be saved if only one phone OS existed.

But then of course that's bad for you, the consumer, because then these huge corporations rule your life and can essentially do whatever they want.

What's the slur here? American? Mind?

I'm American, and I wasn't offended. Because it's true, we actually can't comprehend this because we are the poster child of government via huge corporations. We literally don't know what it's like to have a functioning and trustworthy government handling these things, it's completely foreign to us.

It's almost certainly true but not intentional. As time goes on, the requirements of software seem to increase. Especially, these days, GPU-wise. Fancy animations and effects are common and they're usually implemented very suboptimally. They only get away with it because of hardware acceleration.

Well... old hardware is slow, and I wouldn't be surprised if it shows.