ddejohn

Forgive my ignorance, but what's wrong with this one?

Sure... yes the bright orange is ugly, but it's not the ugliness that prevents you from getting shot, it's the bright unnatural color. Other hunters aren't thinking "oh that's really ugly, it must not be something I can shoot" they're thinking "bright orange means person, I should not fire my rifle in that direction".

> If it wasn't, it wouldn't grab my attention so well.

Are you saying that if you thought the bright orange was pretty it wouldn't occur to you not to fire your gun in its direction?

Ugliness is not the point of hi-vis vests lol, the point is to not get shot by other hunters.

FWIW, you'd also have the benefit of being able to unit test your logic.

My next car I got in 2021 was a 2007 Prius. It has a super thick A-pillar in a really terrible spot that makes turning left quite stressful. The turning radius is amazing and I love driving what these days is considered a "compact car", but I absolutely loathe the A-pillar. I am constantly dancing in my seat to see around it, and will check both ways 4 or 5 times before crossing roads from a side street because my field of view is so limited.

I've always mused about whether reducing vision for the sake of crash safety actually ends up resulting in more accidents. Is it better to try to prevent accidents by improving visibility or mitigate harm in the event of an accident (which seems more and more like an inevitability these days where I live where there's virtually zero traffic enforcement; I see red-light runners multiple times per day, and a section of our city highway with 55 mph speed limit has the entire traffic stream going 75)?

I could talk for days about the design of modern cars in the US...

Any tips for somebody looking to visit Japan in the next year or so?

... if you're a full-time traveler that can afford to stay for months at a time. For the rest (the vast majority) of us, the GP comment is what we get.

Or just stop supporting altogether, a la Spotify Car Thing.

Sometimes it takes minutes. I have, on more than one occasion, given up on buying a product because of this. It's actually insane to me how much effort sites put into preventing users from using them.

I get it, most people are idiots with completely non-existent security hygiene, but man does it suck being punished because of just how low the common denominator is here.

edit: and also, do you think that's healthy??

No, it isn't. This is some Curtis Yarvin BS.

> So, any solution that truly addresses the _original_ funding disaster must be future-compatible with an internet in which we've overcome the burden of nation-states.

What does this even mean? How do you envision a "future-compatible" CVE database? And what does it have to do with nation states?

> Or maybe you didn't, because talk is cheap, and you didn't actually know anything. Because nobody knew anything.

Wait. Your argument for why people weren't prepared for a second Trump admin being worse is... that they didn't think to get rich off of it?

We've known about RFK Jr all along so yes, if somebody is surprised by the secretary of health being anti-vax, that somebody is irresponsibly ignorant. If that somebody also claims that nobody could have foreseen this, or that prior to him being picked they were fond of reassuring people that "there's no way it'll be that bad"... yeah I'd 100% associate that with the type of behavior becoming of a Russian troll.

I find it really weird and cringey that you're bringing up ego. I don't feel like I'm smarter than everybody else, nor am I claiming to be, nor do I see how any of my comments could even be construed as such. To say this is about me thinking I'm smarter than everybody else is to imply that I'm relishing in the fact that I "foresaw what others couldn't", which is just... an insanely idiotic thing to say. I'm not a sociopath. And for what it's worth, I know plenty of people who also saw this coming.

To be clear, it's a tragedy that so many people were ignorant of what a second Trump admin would be capable of, but that's not really the point I'm trying to make; I am specifically taking issue with your insistence that it was somehow impossible for anybody else to foresee this.

Best of luck in life.

Even the premise of their argument is silly -- "evidence-based extrapolation" lmao that's not how politics work at all.

Saying "there wasn't any evidence" is borderline bot-speak. Anybody who thought Trump 2.0 was going to be like the first round was simply not paying attention at all and anybody telling others it wasn't going to be like the first admin is either a Russian troll, the mainstream media, or just plain irresponsibly ignorant.

"Nobody could have foreseen this" is about the dumbest take I think I've seen so far.

Nothing wrong with that, in my opinion.

I always check comments first before clicking the link, unless it's something I'm knowledgeable about and/or interested in and already know I want to read. It saves a lot of time.

Why on Earth not? Maybe a blog about conflict in the middle east isn't the place, but a blog sharing stories about the tech industry? Surely some humorous screenshots will add to the experience.

Obviously just throwing in random images totally unrelated to the subject matter would be a huge turnoff, but I cannot think of any reason why you'd take such an absolute position on something so low-stakes.

One thing to note -- you stated in another comment that the repository pattern is just for database access, but this isn't really true. You can use the repository pattern for any type of service that requires fetching data from some other location or multiple locations -- whether that's a database, another HTTP API, a plain old file system, a gRPC server, an ftp server, a message queue, an email service... whatever.

This has been hugely helpful for me as one of the things my company does is aggregate data from a lot of other APIs (whois records, stuff of that nature). Multiple times we've had to switch providers due to contract issues or because we found something better/cheaper. Being able to swap out implementations was incredibly helpful because the business logic layer and its unit tests didn't need to be touched at all.

Before I started my current role, we had been using kafka for message queues. There was a huge initiative to switch over to rabbit and it was extremely painful ripping out all the kafka stuff and replacing it with rabbit stuff and it took forever and we still have issues with how the switch was executed to this day, years later. If we'd been using the repository pattern, the switch would've been a piece of cake.

I have yet to see an AI-generated image that was "really cool".

AI images and videos strike me as the coffee pods of the digital world -- we're just absolutely littering the internet with garbage. And as a bonus, it's also environmentally devastating to the real world!

I live nearby a landfill, and go there often to get rid of yard waste, construction materials, etc. The sheer volume of perfectly serviceable stuff people are throwing out in my relatively small city (<200k) is infuriating and depressing. I think if more people visited their local landfills, they might get a better sense for just how much stuff humans consume and dispose. I hope people are noticing just how much more full of trash the internet has become in the last few years. It seems like it, but then I read this thread full of people that are still hyped about it all and I wonder.

This isn't even to mention the generated text... it's all just so inane and I just don't get it. I've tried a few times to ask for relatively simple code and the results have been laughable.

The coverage of this story has felt a lot like it's being used as an excuse to trick people into believing that Signal is nOT a sECuRe mESsAGing APp to discourage regular people from using it.

Being elderly, the frustration must be unbearable.