I have young kids also, so I try to stay away from violent or scary album art.
50 karma · joined December 2, 2019
I have young kids also, so I try to stay away from violent or scary album art.
My kids are too young for it, but it lead me to find GCompris (especially with kiosk mode) which is for a much better fit for my kid's ages.
I promised myself if I became ultra-wealthy I would start a "Journal of Null Science" to collect these publications. (this journal still doesn't exist)
> The Concorde, which was retired in 2003, was built jointly by the British and French governments.
This is the technicality TechCrunch is using to make this claim.
Will there be other tip shapes available?
Is the tip design patented (and enforced) or will you allow for 3rd party tips?
Honestly, it's because I just don't care. I'm not worried about her changing plans or going somewhere without telling me (the feels dirty just thinking about) and at a certain age, I also won't care what my kids do. They will also change plans, or explore off the path. So what? But that one time I _really_ need to call them or they need help, we will be glad they have a little bit of tech on them.
I also find it somewhat interesting that many of the same people who are so worried about this type of surveillance _already_ have the devices and/or technical knowledge to surveil others and choose not to for whatever reason. For example, we have home networks and could track what our families do online. We _could_ put a malicious app into someone's phone, or a tracker on someone's car. Simply having the ability to do something does not imply that it will be done, and certainly doesn't imply that it will be done maliciously.
I completely attribute this to SQL being difficult or "backwards" to parse. I mean backwards in the way that in SQL you start with what you want first (the SELECT) rather than what you have and widdling it down. Also in SQL (as the author states) you often need to read and understand the structure of the database before you can be 100% sure what the query is doing. SQL is very difficult to parse into a consistent symbolic language.
The turning point for me was to just accept SQL for what it is. It feels overly flexible in some areas (and then comparatively ridgid in other areas), but instead of fighting against this or trying to understand it as a consistent, precise language , I instead just go "oh SQL - you are not like the other programming languages I use but you can do some pretty neat stuff so we can be on good terms".
Writing good SQL involves understanding the database, understanding exactly the end result you want, and only then constructing the subqueries or building blocks you need to get to your result. (then followed by some trial and error of course)
I suppose I could look into writing a coroutine that listens for messages on a queue and then runs the `emit()` from SM - just not clear to me if that's the "right way".