arthur-st

I guess I'll add that this is mostly possible using a Docker-based workflow, but the hope is that one day we could get something more lightweight.

Any ongoing work/plans to follow for cross-platform lock files?

This is one concern that would prevent the team I'm on from moving. We do ML work, so I'll use a pytorch-based project for my example. The desired state is that all dependencies are in pyproject.toml, e.g., from which you can generate a set of lockfiles from an AArch64 Mac or an AMD64 Windows workstation for the following platform configurations:

1. Mac with default (MPS) pytorch

2. Windows with CUDA pytorch

3. AArch64 Linux with CPU pytorch

4. AMD64 Linux with CPU pytorch

5. AMD64 Linux with CUDA pytorch

P.S. Big thanks for making Ruff, we're huge fans of linting and formatting both.

It’s worth noting that ePrivacy directive is an EU directive, in contrast to GDPR being an EU regulation.

Inconsistent enforcement is a feature of directives. The comment on the GDPR though is full-well valid.

I have, and I am indeed very hopeful about the WWDC 2024-related Swift announcements. My comment was meant to illustrate my thinking circa a year or two ago.

I think it depends on the person. My anecdotal experience is that I'm using Go for hobby projects because with Python at my day job, I wanted a modern language with fancy-ish static typing. Additionally, I wanted it to be equally practical on Win/Mac/Linux, and to not run inside a VM.

The obvious first candidate was Rust, but the low-level features were unnecessary overhead. A "higher-level Rust" is literally Swift, but the portability is not there. The search basically ended here, so I went with Go as a consolation prize - I don't get a fancy type system to play with, but the development ergonomics, especially with the v2 modules system, are the best I've experienced yet.

Ditto on the recommendation, I’ve been using them since the 2013 launch.

Over the years, web has sadly become a bit more closed in terms of having accessible feeds and such. Firehosing is another problem, when some sites just offer one feed that has way too much in it.

But when it works, it works great. In addition to RSS, I also run newsletters, YouTube, and a few other things through it.

I find them very informative, to have a clear indicator if a site's answer to upholding my rights is genuine effort or malicious compliance.

Indeed, they are within their rights to make decisions, including questionable[1] ones. Which is what the conversation is about – not if they can be doing this, but if they should be doing this.

[1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/g5yq7q/judge-affirms-jack-do...

This really is a full disclosure, huh.

Thank you for making it, I'm a fan.

Time to share the testing protocol details, I think. Unless you want people to just believe that [4,5], two of 3 most recommended ad blockers for Apple devices, don’t work or don’t remain up to date.

Yeah, took a few hours of work and 1 week for correspondence to clear. Your point?

Other countries have more functional social safety networks, so lesser emphasis is put on individual charity to compensate for environmental failings. To give you an anecdotal example, where I’m from American way of going about charity is often perceived as a form of virtue signalling/paying off your sins.

To answer your question before my unprompted musing, I agree. I think the majority of people won't get anything out of understanding the nitty-gritty detail of this discourse, and will spend a lot of energy fending off bipartisan "WE TOLD U SO" bickering along the way. However, appropriate authorities should keep working on the problem, even if just to determine that there's no data to get to the bottom of this at all.

> but I don't think anyone is saying that.

Part of the timeline that seems to miss from some discussions, including the article brought by the OP, is that Donald Trump did in fact make that sort of statements, on several occasions[1], even though you unlikely mean that the same way. While e.g. Cotton's words have not been treated with due rigour by some journalistic media outlets, the social media platform crackdown on the associated terms, in my memory, did happen after Trump's statements had a measurable hate crime effect.

[1] The earliest example - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-trump-...

> “But we’re going to find out. You’ll be learning in the not-too-distant future. But it’s a terrible thing that happened - whether they made a mistake or whether it started off as a mistake and then they made another one. Or did somebody do something on purpose?” he said.

In my subjective opinion, the conversation in general both was and still is overall chaotic, often conflating at least some of the following:

1. Natural virus transmitted from source animal. Sensible zoonosis scenario.

2. Natural virus transmitted from "incubating" animal. Sensible zoonosis, again.

3. Natural virus leaving lab due to a storage safety failure. Sensible lab accident scenario.

4. Natural virus leaving lab due to an operations safety failure. Sensible lab accident scenario.

5. Natural virus modified successfully by the lab, doing 3-4. Often deemed less likely, but nonetheless a fundamentally sensible scenario.

6. Natural virus modified successfully by the lab, intentionally released from the lab by the Chinese government. Sometimes this flavour also implies that the virus was modified not with gain-of-function research goal, but with biological warfare goals straight up. Feels the same thing on paper, but in terms of language used the latter is substantially more visceral, evoking defensive reaction. Either way, this does not make any much sense, given economic stakes. CCP may have a heavy-handed enforcement of their interests, but they count their own money better than anyone else.

7. Artificially created virus, doing a 3 or 4. Sometimes with intentionality implication. There doesn't seem to be any significant research supporting this as a plausible scenario.

8. Intentionally (to harm the proverbial West) designed artificial virus, doing a 6. Straight up Tom Clancy's book material.

I've seen "lab leak" applied by some journalists to anything from 3 to 8 including. The problem here is that 6-8 predominantly are political rallying calls for a base eager for a confrontation with China, potentially to detract from anticipated fallout from the domestic containment effort. Much easier to say "woe betide us, this sophisticated oriental bioweapon", than to say "well we have this entire government agency designed to handle this, but everything we've done has fallen flat". The end result of this final bunch of theories was a spike of anti-Asian hate crimes, e.g., someone in my town got imprisoned for anti-Chinese hatred incitement. The last case like that in my memory was in the noughts.

Look up e.g. VISA corporate responsibility report for 2019. It’s been some time since I’ve seen that, but iirc Bitcoin hash power takes like 120 TWh, “Big Tech” combined is like 50 TWh, and VISA with all the nuts and bolts (and people) is like 0.2 TWh - with proven consumption of renewable energy.

Could you clarify what you mean, please? Surely the argument is that some politicians busy undermining the EU and promoting leaving it, or other manoeuvres born out of Eurosceptic populism, also used the EU as a way to shield themselves from responsibility for unpopular laws via passing them "abroad", which they could use to then rally their domestic basic on Eurosceptic grounds, isn't it? You seem to be saying the opposite.

Really postmodernist take on mail-order brides.

2019 laptop sales are 9.3% of laptop sales for years 2010-2019 (https://www.statista.com/statistics/272595/global-shipments-...). The phrase "Faster than 98% of PC laptops" in itself is very general, an it's fair to assume that it's e.g. all laptops currently in use, or ever made - in part since this is a sales pitch, rather than a technical specification item. If we add 1990-2009 laptops to the statistic above, the share of purportedly modern laptops will just shrink, and substantially at that.

Then you have to add on top of that the consideration of what are the laptops people are actually buying and using. I can assure you that neither enterprise clients nor everyone outside of select, relatively spoiled, group people concentrated in just a few areas are regularly buying top of the line workstation or gaming laptops.

The parent is very much right, amongst techies there's an unhealthy tendency for self-righteous adjudication of the narrative or context.

Haha, I first chuckled at this, and then it dawned upon me that I do plan a week off in July-August, having had 2 weeks off in April. European here, of course.