czx4f4bd

It's not. "Corporal punishment" is the correct spelling in the US, too.

I would be interested to see that article. I tried googling for it but could only find some articles about censorship on Chinese streaming sites and Netflix missing some scenes from the DVD release due to issues with the master copies.

He confessed to cheating online, not over the board. People have used shoddy statistics to allege that he cheated over the board, but none of them have held up under scrutiny.

I'm not saying the guy is a saint, but low-effort cheating in low-stakes online games by looking at an engine in the background seems substantially different than what would be required to cheat completely undetectably in major tournaments with many people watching.

It by no means diminishes the magnitude of the list, but it's worth noting that the list is heavily bloated because any person with multiple aliases or whose name can be spelled in multiple ways (e.g. due to differing romanization systems) will have a separate entry for every known alias and spelling.

From the original Daily Dot article:

> The list, according to crimew, appeared to have more than 1.5 million entries in total. The data included names as well as birth dates. It also included multiple aliases, placing the number of unique individuals at far less than 1.5 million.

> On the list were several notable figures, including the recently freed Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout, alongside over 16 potential aliases for him.

> The aliases comprised different, common misspellings of his last name and other versions of his first name, as well as different birthdays. Many of the birthdays aligned with the recorded date Bout was born.

https://www.dailydot.com/debug/no-fly-list-us-tsa-unprotecte...

So there aren't 1.5 million people on the no fly list, but there's still a hell of a lot of people to ban secretly and arbitrarily from flying with no clear justification given and no clear way to get off the list.

Just repeating "fauxpen source" doesn't mean anything to me. What actual change are you referring to?

> Reminds me of how Microsoft dumped Atom (and then fauxpen-sourced VSCode before dumping the last remnants of Atom).

I'm confused by this. Microsoft released the VS Code source in 2015, long before they acquired GitHub in 2018 and sunset Atom in 2022.

This is really cool. I wondered if there was anything like this for generating docker-compose files, and it turns out there is: https://github.com/Red5d/docker-autocompose

Awk is a fun, surprisingly powerful language. Even plain mawk can do a lot, but gawk has debugger support, profiling, namespaces, and even network support. (I wouldn't necessarily go out of my way to use most of those features, but it's possible!)

It's honestly worth giving the mawk and gawk manual a skim just to see what all they can do. I want to read through The AWK Programming Language as well.

https://invisible-island.net/mawk/manpage/mawk.html

https://www.gnu.org/software/gawk/manual/gawk.html

> If your problem is that you are unjustifiably negative, then maybe chanting positive things to yourself will help.

Not sure if I'm misreading you or if you misread me, but my comment was not a defense of positive affirmations. I don't believe that positive affirmations will help with the necessary mental reframing needed to combat deeper emotional trauma and mental health struggles.

That said, I'm not convinced by this:

> I think the problem facing most people is having standards they see others meet that they do not.

If someone feels badly enough about not meeting a standard that those feelings rise to the level of a problem, then I agree that positive affirmations probably won't help, but meeting the standard isn't necessarily a panacea either.

Taking your example, if someone thinks "I should be married by now", there's presumably some kind of deeper emotion behind that. If that feeling is within a normal range and the person can manage it effectively, then it may motivate them to work harder to find a relationship and settle down, but in that case it wouldn't be reasonable to call it a problem.

On the other hand, if they have a stronger feeling like "All my friends are married but me. They must think I'm pathetic." or "I keep getting older but nobody wants to date me. What if I'm just doomed to be alone forever?", then this is much more likely to be problematic. This kind of feeling might motivate them to settle for a relationship that doesn't make them happy, to move more quickly than they're comfortable with, to do things that go against their own needs, to stay in the relationship even in the face of problems, etc. just to try and meet that standard.

In this latter case, the standard isn't the issue, but it's tied to the deeper issue. The standard is the focus in the person's mind because it feels like the truth, but their mental framing is also biased in a way that prevents them from seeing their underlying motivation, and thus from resolving the true problem.

For example, the person who feels pathetic for being the only unmarried person in their friend group likely has deeper confidence issues that won't be addressed by marriage alone, even if their partner is supportive. Likewise, the person who fears being alone forever may temporarily alleviate that fear through marriage, but they'll also probably come to fear their partner leaving them, leading only to more anxiety and distress.

> You become confident by taking on challenges, repeatedly coming out on top, and providing your brain undeniable evidence you are who you say you are.

Ironically, this is basically just a positive affirmation in a slightly different form, and it's not any more helpful.

Some people's brains have a remarkable ability to deny, invalidate, or straight-up forget any evidence that would potentially bolster their confidence. This kind of trite advice may be great for people who are already predisposed to confidence and find themselves in a rut, but as someone who's in therapy for this kind of thing, some people need more help to get to a better place.

Yeah, variance between different system utilities is one of the biggest underrated perils of shell scripting. For a long time, I worked on a team that mostly used Macs to administer Linux servers, which led to some confusing issues when people tested certain commands locally and then tried to use them on a server.

It would be nice if shellcheck had checks to detect common BSD/GNU incompatibilities and warn about them so you don't have to catch them in the moment.

How do you accomplish that for a programming language? Make the language open source but sell a proprietary debugger? And how does that solve the problem corporations controlling languages, given that you would presumably have a corporation controlling at least the proprietary components?

The US government obtained that data by illegally tapping into Google's data centers, which means the government was still the entity violating the 4th amendment.

If you want to criticize Google's data collection, fine, but doing it in terms of the 4th amendment is just nonsensical. If you want to criticize companies for collecting data that could subsequently be illegally collected by the government, then every single company that collects any PII/private information could be criticized on the same basis.

Google isn't a branch of the US government, so the 4th amendment doesn't apply. If you want adtech surveillance to be regulated, lobby for GDPR-style regulation in the US.

Really? Bruce is pro-backdoor?

Where's that pro-backdoor advocacy in this essay from 2013 on evading NSA surveillance and warning about the risk of backdoored cryptography? https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2013/09/nsa_surveil...

Or this essay from 2016 arguing that backdoors sabotage security? https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2016/04/the_value_o...

Or this essay from 2019 decrying yet another effort to backdoor encryption? https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2019/12/scaring_peopl...

I remembered this post today and saw it hadn't been submitted to HN in a while, so I thought it might be worth revisiting. I would be interested to know how the state of JSON parsing has evolved since the post's last update in 2018, but I haven't come across a more recent analysis like this.

Previous discussions:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16897061 (2018)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20724672 (2019)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28826600 (2021)

I'm not sure I understand how that scenario would arise with a monorepo. The whole point of a monorepo is that everything changes together, so if you have a shared internal library, every service should be using the same version of that library at all times.

I've only played with it and not done anything too serious, but Gambas is honestly amazing for something that has seemingly little adoption. It's so similar to VB6, but with tons of enhancements that keep it from feeling too antiquated or annoying to work with.

The original article cited the SPLC, not the ADL, so this has literally nothing to do with the topic at hand except that the GP commenter's mind for some reason jumped to the ADL while trying to defend books about murdering Jews and other minorities.

It would have taken you two minutes of investigation to realize that these books are nothing like To Kill a Mockingbird. You could have read the SPLC article that the author linked, which lists numerous books explicitly promoting white supremacy, violence against minorities, and ultimately the extermination of anyone who isn't white. Or you could've just looked up the books' summaries and a few choice quotes to see how overtly racist they are.

From Mein Kampf:

> The Jews were responsible for bringing Negroes into the Rhineland, with the ultimate idea of bastardizing the white race which they hate and thus lowering its cultural and political level so that the Jew might dominate. For as long as a people remain racially pure and are conscious of the treasure of their blood, they can never be overcome by the Jew. Never in this world can the Jew become master of any people except a bastardized people.

From the Turner Diaries, in an extended passage describing the author's extermination fantasy, much of which is too grotesque to even share:

> There are many thousands of hanging female corpses like that in this city tonight, all wearing identical placards around their necks. They are the White women who were married to or living with Blacks, with Jews, or with other non-White males. There are also a number of men wearing the I-defiled-my-race placard, but the women easily outnumber them seven or eight to one. On the other hand, about ninety per cent of the corpses with the I-betrayed-my-race placards are men, and overall the sexes seem to be roughly balanced.

> so called “racist” books

Setting aside questions about the morality of banning books, why is "racist" in scare quotes here? The only two books I saw the author explicitly note as being unbanned were Mein Kampf and the Turner Diaries. Are you suggesting that these works are falsely maligned and not truly racist?

The only one that's stuck with me is https://github.com/microsoft/pyright, mainly because I thought it was strange that Microsoft would publish something such a lackluster README. It's not the worst ever, but it lacks a clear sales pitch and a concise explanation of why you'd use it instead of mypy. If you go in without that added context, it's kind of mystifying why it even exists or why you'd use it compared with the alternatives.

I guess I'm one of those anti-social people, because my first thought was that anyone hotlinking a script from your server without permission is basically inviting you to deface -- uh, I mean, "creatively redesign" their website for them for free.

I live in an apartment complex with a lot of neighbors and a fair amount of churn, so I have actually seen open networks nearby. I also can't be sure that someone won't move in and create a new one.

Oops. Thanks for the correction. I only lightly skimmed the project page, so I think the "Support 10x Development" header made me assume it was an open source project asking for donations.

That said, I'm not really sure why I specified "open source" since my gripe definitely goes for any software project, and probably doubly so for commercial ones, since those actually need a literal sales pitch to convince potential users of their value proposition.

No, this is just one of many reasons I haven't yet bought a smart TV. I probably will give in this year, but only because I can finally afford something much larger than what I have today.

Here's the thing: At the end of the day, a smart TV has capabilities that I don't need or want, including to change how it functions without warning or consent. However unlikely the possibility is, a smart TV still has the capability to connect to an open network, phone home, and start doing shit I don't want, which means I have to trust it to not do that.

On the other hand, my old dumb TV has none of those capabilities, so I can trust it precisely because I don't need to trust it. I know it can't do anything except display what it receives on its inputs.

Therefore, any time I've considered replacing my TV with a newer one, I've always weighed predictability against uncertainty and opted in favor of the predictability of what I own.

Maybe that's overly paranoid of me, but at the end of the day, I just haven't wanted a new TV as much as I've wanted something I can trust.

And this is why I have avoided buying a smart TV for almost ten years now. A TV is a consumer product. I should not have to open it up and modify the fucking hardware just to make it work how I want.

This is one of my biggest gripes with a lot of open source [edit: and also non-open source] projects. It's sort of baffling to me when I come across a project that the maintainers clearly want to be used, but there's no clear and concise explanation of what the project is, why you'd want to use it, and how it compares with major alternatives.

The first image in the linked Reddit post literally says "Best alternative to Kdenlive", though.

Yes, the general applicability of these concepts is exactly why they should be emphasized when teaching OOP rather than wasting time on uselessly contrived examples of inheritance.

However, I'm not really sure why your comment is framed as a counterpoint to mine. I explained what it took for me to grok OOP, but I never said OOP alone provides composition and dynamic dispatch. It seems needlessly antagonistic to make this some kind of programming paradigm pissing contest when that has nothing to do with anything I said.