mpolichette

Jumping on this, what about on-device?

I'd love an privacy first on-device model i could use in iOS.

Ahh, the bay selection was what I was missing!

That works wonderfully. Thank you!

P.S. I showed this to a friend, and he asked if we could mock something up, export the dxf, and send it to a cut shop... you could end up with your own flatpack pipeline.

Yeah... I was trying to figure out what he was pointing to, and was like.. oh, the Firefox website... went there and was pretty uninspired by the design, at least in desktop.

One other note, is there a way to see the bay map larger? I am trying to see the height between shelves and the measurement does not show because there is not enough space for it.

I know I could do the math :P

This is amazing, I may use it for a built-in pantry i'm planning to build.

In my use case, I end up with one side at an angle, is there a way to support that?

I don't disagree, but I think there is the otherside of that same coin... What if we could do other stuff while remaining productive.

Rather than the example of missing first steps, what if we had, "Ok Claude, prepare a few slides for my presentation, I'm going to watch my childs mid-day recital..." maybe you get a success/failure ping and maybe even need to step out for part of the event, but in another world you couldn't have gone at all.

I thought they were talking about one of their coworkers

/s

I've recently started writing an app intended for a raspberry pi that uses IMAP to automate this exact thing.

The goal is for it to apply the rules and followup with actions while still letting me interact with my email from any client I want.

I'd also consider that, for these people, getting away with the cheating _is the game_ for them. What they're cheating at might be less important.

Short of jail, nowhere in adulthood are you required to stay somewhere by law.

On top of that, I don’t think the kid quietly using their phone and ignoring class is the main issue here… it’s causing issues with the other kids and making the experience worse for a lot of kids.

I like the cataloging, but I dont see the periodic part of this.

Could dementia in congress create a security threat?

I tend to agree, however, I typically tell people that if you see longer function names, you should watch out for complexity. In fact, if I have to write some overly complex code that I can’t isolate for some reason, I will usually try to show it in the names being extra long.

Computers were invented to speed up calculations, and yet the primary thing we use them for today is to read the news and send each other messages and memes…

I think it’s totally reasonable, to expect developers to find the real use

I have the same rules

I think this option is still ripe for issues within a domestic abuse situation. The abuser would simply use their phone to “trust it”.

Maybe a longer dismissal though?

I always have to remind myself that they’re dependency arrows and not a sequence ordering.

They make it look like it flows right to left even though time (or at least sequence) flows left to right.

Oh, come on now, Zabzonk is a great name

I read this as “The book is included”

If you don’t fix it… and the code is working… what is the problem?

I leave notes like that sometime as indicators of intention… or invitation to the next reader… but if it never changes and is not causing issues… that’s fine, leave it as is.

I can empathize with the author here that types can be very challenging to get right, especially with high amounts of dynamism.

However, I think that saying it is "terrible for library developers" is a bit far. I think its terrible for developers who want to make use of advance types... which ultimately doesn't depend if you're a library dev at all.

It boils down to: "Typescript learning curve gets really steep after the basics"

The author mentions they help maintain redux-saga. I don't want to dig on them, but from my personal experience, that library takes you down quite an opinionated application path with complexity inherit to it. Heck, just making types for redux was a pain, let alone adding async and additional composability.

My take is that the author has chosen complex tech to work with, and that influences the complexity in their types.

I've been using Workflowy for years now. I really love it.

They been working lots of interesting features in but stick to the basics that everything starts as a list. You would be surprised what is possible w/ just a list!

MDN docs are the best... they should monetize via high level articles and example implementations for systems.

For example, the webRTC docs are great and explain a lot about how it works... however, there is very little information about good patterns for including it in your application. I bet people would be happy to pay for guides like that, I would.

I think these questions come from the idea baked into charitable giving. When you purchase a good, the thing you're getting is obvious, it is what you're purchasing.

However, when you're giving to charity, what are you getting? You probably want to know.

If charities are smart, I bet they could take advantage of this by creating classic ladders which encourage more contributions if people get a say of where a "portion of their donation" goes.

I've thought about hooking into messages w/ a running mac before... Do you have a high level description of your approach? I looked in the iMessage GraphQL Server server repo for docs but didn't see anything obvious...

On a quick investigation I noticed you are reading the sqlite db... but it wasn't super clear how you send/receive messages?

I'll entertain this...

Because, like it or not, you're often still sending/receiving documents? :)

Also the semantics of the actions map really well to the use cases still.

You're, of course, more than welcome to avoid the whole thing and use WebSockets or WebRTC data channels with a custom protocol.

I'm with you on this one. I prefer it to be in your face simple to understand over the terse-ness.

In the gist example, I actually prefer the SQL-92 approach where we are joining given an explicit comparison condition. Every other implementation seems to be trying to hide details, for what gain? Less typing?

In order to use FOREIGN, you will need to know not just what columns a table has, but also their configuration. Which would also require that you have properly configured your tables. While this shouldn't be a hard ask, it does add additional dependency and makes use of this "tool" slightly less "portable" between systems.

I have unfortunately seen cases where people will only have foreign keys un-enforced by their table config. As a dev, if you're introduced to a new DB, you wont know immediately if you can use this, and if things are configured wrong, you need to make a pretty significant change to be able to use it.

I don't see a lot of harm from adding this syntax however as people are free to not use it and it relies on an existing strict convention.

This ^

I feel like JS gets thrown under the bus in discussions, but no body talks about arcane file structures in Java or implicit pathing lookups which have the same kind of "historical path dependence" to why they exist as JS has for require/import.

All languages have their warts and 99% of the time they're all doing the same thing just in slightly different ways.

I want to agree with you... the problem arises because you're applying your values to those items... e.g. "yeah they're embarrassing/bad, but not really that bad"...

However, it becomes scary when the people with access are much less level-headed. There are people who think gay people or watching porn should require treatment. There have been power changes where people with drastically different views have an agenda to push, and your innocuous "not really that bad" is all of a sudden an imprisonable offense because you "think differently" and you might encourage others.

I hope it stays down... oh wait, that was yesterdays thing...