lowercased

> For example, Livewire components don’t support slots

IIRC, Livewire 4 will support slots, but... that's still a few weeks away from release. There seem to be a number of perf and qol improvements in LW4.

That's a lot more involved than the c64 version I remember!

The docs up through version 3.x explicitly called this out as not recommended and a poor choice, but the justifications were... sort of lame. "You'll have to come up with class names, your css bundle might be bigger, etc". I did read a more technical github issue on @apply vs theme() which called out the apply behaviour as doing a bit more than expected. I don't recall 'theme' being a thing in earlier tailwind versions, but I'm not an expert at it, so I might have missed that.

He disrupted fatherhood!

Moved from SE to 12 mini, now a 13 mini - just bought used last year. Will likely hold on for another year or two. Desperately want a small screen. There just seem to be no options.

Re: thumb - I have found some gesture to pull the screen down halfway so you can reach the 'top' part without moving your hand. It's close to OK, and it's almost second nature now, but still annoying.

At first blush, it would seem the use of the name/logo really violates something, making it look 'official'. Something referencing their name, without the logo, and a bit 'not officially affiliated with' notice might have earned a bit more cooperation from them, vs legal aggression so soon.

You're welcome. Thanks for the sponsorships! They DO work, but I imagine sometimes hard to quantify. I know I've been able to recommend geocodio first hand to folks in my user groups who a) hadn't heard of it and b) wouldn't have been able to attend conferences.

FWIW, first time I saw you was at LonghornPHP in Austin. 2021, IIRC.

well... yes, at that rate, it could. :)

thanks for sharing your tool!

FWIW, I'd found https://www.geocod.io/ to be a good service a couple years back. They sponsored some conferences I went to, and I needed some geocoding->timezone info. IIRC, at the time, it was $5/month which covered everything we needed. Dunno if that's eye-watering or not.

Seems to have changed pricing a bit since. The 'pay as you go' model now has 2500 API calls/day for free, and $1/2000 API calls after that. My needs never grew in to needing much more than what we hit for that $5/month, so I can't vouch for their service at a large scale, but I enjoyed using it.

No affiliation just a happy former customer.

Amen.

You also have to find the people who have authority to make buying decisions in the first place.

And... many times people saying "tool X sucks"... it might, but that's the only tool that is blessed, or is the only one that has integration with something else they rely on, etc.

I seem to recall Lennon's "Instant Karma" phase, where he wanted to just get stuff out. Had a song idea, recorded, mixed, shipped out to pressing and was for sale in stores within 10 days.

I suspect a lot of artists over the years have just itched to get something out today, but yeah... without the tech, it was just impossible.

It's that last step - 5 - which I think is a missing piece of the discussion. A lot of private company pharma and medical research is often doing the 'last mile' work that started in university research programs. Stuff that looks promising is picked up and commercialized, but there's usually significant work the research people have done before big commercial players take it to market. They're not doing all their research from scratch - they're taking the best bits funded by our government research programs and bringing them to market. Cutting university research will damage the private sector pretty quickly.

From the article...

“They’re just spinning their wheels, citing in many cases overstated or fake savings,” said Romina Boccia, the director of budget and entitlement policy at the libertarian Cato Institute. “What’s most frustrating is that we agree with their goals. But we’re watching them flail at achieving them.”

To your point, people have taken musk/doge at face value, with 'efficiency' being the goal. That's not been the goal. But... pointing that out seems to make you some sort of conspiracy theorist.

"Just give them time! It takes time!"

We did have some meaningful government cutbacks in the 90s. It took months of bipartisan collaboration and dealmaking, and we ended up with a balanced budget and a bit of a surplus. The process was a lot more open, experts were consulted, hearings and studies were done, and we did make some short-lived progress there.

None of that process was even entertained. We had a charlatan foisted on us in the role of "chief slasher of anything woke", and a third of our country cheered it on, until they got cut. Those not cut/affected still seem to support this circus.

> It's now going to be almost impossible to have people realise the truth, especially those people who support Trump

NOW? It's been this way for close to 10 years.

> and cars now are quieter than ever

But no one drives cars any more. They drive trucks. And motorcycles. And anything with engines designed to tell everyone how powerful they are.

I appreciate my friends/neighbors with electric cars. They do not offset the neighbors with F150s, Silverados, Tundras and other behemoths with v6/v8 gasoline engines.

Otherwise, why vote to raise the debt ceiling, right?

It will be used to make tax cuts available.

> GSA employees were told that when it comes to what they can use GSAi for, “the options are endless.”

I'm reminded of zombo.com.

The only limit is yourself.

The infinite is possible at ZomboCom.

I don't think that's "unified memory" though.

The intro video mentioned the serverless databases take about 200ms to wake from hibernation. No idea on app workers, but... I would think it's within that ballpark... ? Might also depend on the app server class you're using?

Wouldn't they get a choice as to what type of authentication they want to use then? I'd assume they could limit access in multiple ways, vs just the dockerhub way.

How are those public contradictions going?

> increase good-faith in the masses big time

What incentive is there for anyone in the Trump administration to care about that? I don't see one.

> I don't think they'd renege on it.

Lower prices on day 1. Stopping Ukraine war on day 1.

Trump just says things in the moment to play for approval, then says something contradictory later if need be. There is no fallout, pushback or consequence from his supporters, and they have control of ... all branches of government right now.

> because they make promises around goals with incomplete understanding and data and then recalibrate as more information becomes available.

Perhaps you should simply announce an investigation, then deliver findings of the investigation and recommendations.

They're starting with the end in mind - the dismantling of the administrative state - then making cuts. Then finding out what the impact might be, then continuing cuts.

There is no good faith here, and there is nothing in 'doubt' that someone should benefit from.

> It is in my nature to give the benefit of the doubt.

There should be little to doubt at this point, however. "Dismantling of the administrative state" was a mantra for many who are now in positions of power.

Then: "Prices will come down on day 1!" Now: "It's hard to get prices to come down once they're up".

At some point, there's not much reason to doubt someone's goals, regardless of what they say. You can look at past say/do combinations and make reasonable predictions.

Stop giving 'benefits' to people with years of documented track records under the aegis of 'doubt'.

Agreed. Show the check numbers, mailing dates, bank transfers, etc. If there's actually really tens of billions flowing out to dead people monthly... demonstrate that. Should NOT be hard at all.

Even trying to determine who the workers were brought down threats of criminal prosecution and investigations.

> However, it’s worrying that a system of age-based payouts has such uncertainty in its data.

The data itself may have to be interpreted, which I would classify as 'suboptimal', but seemingly 'normal' for most projects I work with. I often have to join together various tables, remembering to include or exclude specific data via conditional logic. The conditional logic may be context-dependent, and documenting those cases is really key. Why include/exclude specific subsets of data to answer questions XYZ? Have those criteria changed over the years (and if so, why?)

Looking at raw data tables it's often quite easy to come up with ways to show the data to support whatever case you're trying to make.

> There is widespread fraud in the government.... There is widespread inefficiency too... I think the people in DOGE have the skills and access to address it.

Given that just getting the names of the people involved in this process incurred Musk's wrath and accusations of criminal behaviour... how can you have any justified belief in people having 'skills' to address 'fraud' and 'inefficiency'?

We'd need some common definition of 'fraud' in the first place. Many of the things that have been labelled 'corruption' seem to just be 'things Musk doesn't like'; I suspect 'fraud' would be similar.

"Inefficiencies" - we have the Chesterton's Fence idea to illustrate that what might be 'inefficient' is intentional with an overall positive purpose. Again, define 'inefficiency'. The rate at which firings have been happening may certainly be 'efficient' from an operational standpoint, but having to scramble to rehire key people who shouldn't have been fired in the first place is 'inefficient' at best.

> I have dozens of explanations which fit the facts, and I don't have any way to determine which, if any, is correct.

I'm not sure we have enough verifiable 'facts' that can support many conclusions at all, and I think that 'fact' itself is evidence of intentionality in keeping the public in the dark about what's going on and why.

I'd imagine many countries would claim a top spot or two, and transition all canadian addresses to, say, 7.0.0.0.0.0. Big companies would probably get some of their own. Legacy/default stuff would have leading 0.0, sure, but... so what?

No, it wouldn't have taken 'exactly as much work to transition'. See another reply. In 2024, I'm still reading about BGP/routing table issues, and hardware having problems keeping up with IPv6 networking - it's just too large. How was this supposed to work in 1999?

A smaller stepped transition from 4 billion addresses to... 64k of those would have been an easier transition step, and the ease - mental, UI, training, testing, security, etc would have given everyone involved the confidence and positive feedback to tackle a next stage to IPv6 (eventually).

Prefix every IP with 'missing' info with 0.0.

Part of this would just be transitory, but... would take up far less space. Even as late as last year, I'm reading stories about BGP issues and slowdowns because routing tables are too large/many for the hardware. In 2024. How on earth was this expected to work on hardware from 1999?