singlow

Hmm - actually read some docs and I think that the implementation of IS NOT DISTINCT FROM was originally implemented one way when nulls were not indexed, but then hasn't been fixed since null indexing was implemented.

My first guess would be that IS NOT DISTINCT FROM considers nulls to match. Indexes might not contain null values. I don't know of postgres indexes are sparse or can be non-sparse? It would be hard to do use a sparse index and find null matches. I would expect this could be optimized away if the column is also not null, but then why would you use the operator in that case so maybe no one has handled it.

At least WePay predates WeChat by a few years and WeWork was founded same year so probably before WeChat was well known.

Its definitely not the only way but it is an option for some people who don't have other types of id.

But the average user is not writing automated systems to populate google drive with millions of files. Once you are doing something that unusual you should understand that nuance. Sure it is fun to hack a tool designed for one purpose to serve another, but if you are writing code for use in production you have to understand these types of design differences.

Older usage of the word does not include amusing coincidences such as this. It used to be used to describe speech which intentionally meant the opposite of its plain meaning for humor or emphasis, such as sarcasm, or in dramatic context a situation where the audience has greater awareness than a character.

Words change and this is a meaning everyone seems to want I guess. I was just pointing out that once you go down this route, its pretty hard to differentiate between what is ironic or not because its a broad and subjective definition.

Your assertion does not make sense to me. Your definition is that the situation is ironic because a slightly broader statement of that situation is ironic? It sounds like you are just saying its ironic because it seems ironic. All that means is that it gives you a feeling which you associate with that word. The reason it seems ironic is that the unexpected outcome of a "life-saving" thing actually resulting in injury, is amusing, because it is the opposite of its intention. In fact almost every time something has a net positive influence on overall outcomes, there will be cases where some outcomes are worse. If you are shot and the surgeon goes to perform life-saving surgury, but it turns out you have an allergy to the anesthetic and it kills you, is that ironic? A doctor who was intending to save you actually killed you. I don't know about this definition but I guess its the one we're stuck with. I'll probably just call it an amusing coincidence though.

You selected the relatively modern definition from the dictionary. That usage is fairly recent and is very broad in definition. The verbal and literary definitions are usually the ones that pedants are protective of. I specifically said that it fits that modern definition. I was actually criticizing the parent for calling out your usage, as if his example was more ironic than yours.

Neither you nor GP gave an example of a traditional meaning of the word Irony. Both of the examples represent the more modern definition of situational irony as "something that is amusingly unexpected". I don't think you can say anything is not ironic under that definition. After all, everything makes sense if you understand it well enough, so any level of surprise would be ironic because what you understood pointed to one outcome and a different outcome was produced. All that is left is whether you find the difference to be amusing or not.

Often many 2-factor setup screens will directly reference GAuthenticator, but it is just a TOTP app so you can use any TOTP app with a GAuthenticator qr code, and you can usually get the secret text for copy paste to a desktop TOTP in case you can't scan a qr code, but i have seen some apps that don't make that easy. There is desktop software that will read qr codes from the screen.

In Google's Workspace Admin just got to:

Security -> Authentication -> 2-step verification

Then choose "Any except verification codes via text, phone call". This allows them to use TOTP, a security key such as a usb key or if they have a phone like a Pixel or iPhone that has a security key built in, or TOTP. They can also approve logins from another device that is already logged in, and can generate long-lived backup codes.

You can also allow only a security key, no TOTP or prompts and if, you do that, you can disable backup codes as well.

If you are admin of a Google domain then you can disable SMS for 2fa and require either a hardware key or TOTP.

Any TOTP app will work, but most people will use an app on their phone. Plenty of desktop apps exist. There are also usb key devices supported.

Most of the time 50% of the population is below average. If you want to fail everyone who is below average you will likely fail 50% of the population.

Sure, it is possible that there are very low outliers pulling the average down so that the median is well above average, but I doubt that is generally the case.

The description of a grade level standard is basically an average performance estimate. It may have been codified in the past when the average was different, and they may have chosen to set the grade-level standard lower than the mathematical average for various reasons.

So it's not necessarily the case that 50% being below grade level is just normal. But without knowing how it is calculated and what the grade-level means, the headline is not useful. The general idea that there is a expectation being met by slightly less than 50% of the population seems totally expected from a mathematical standpoint and does not indicate any deficiency on its own.

Lets say it were worded like this: "Less than 50% of students are not meeting minimum grade-level proficiency standards in math." That would tell me something much more concerning. Because Minimum standards should be something that a vast majority of students can achieve. But it will always be the case that if we have and estimate of the "normal" mathematics ability for a particular grade, about 50% will likely exceed it and about 50% will likely fall short.

So does on-grade-level mean minimum expectations, or an estimate of normal grade-level abilities? I don't know. Reading through the website I see that when their standard is that the student shows competency that is consistent with progress toward being ready to take college level courses after finishing 12th grade. So it seems that they have set milestones for certain skills and placed them along a track for each grade. However those tracks are still likely influenced by the average abilities of most students.

I would still expect that any given student is likely to have productive periods and less productive periods throughout their schooling and might fall-behind for a while and might catch up later when some focus is returned. As a result I would still expect that at any time a large portion of students are going to be in falling-behind mode, then catching up later. Only a small percentage will just spend their entire time being ahead of the curve in math ability. The ones who don't have a particular interest will do what it takes to meet minimum often enough, when pressured by parents or teachers or counselors.

If the standards are set so low that 70% of students stay ahead of them most of the time, the standards are probably too low and we are not ambitious enough in our expections. Likely we would not sufficiently motivate the schools to achieve maximally. If they are so high that 70% of students at any time are falling behind, then they are probably too high and would only be discouraging. ~50% seems ideal to me. If we had 55% of students meeting expectations at any time, I'd want to raise the expectations.

If nearly 50% of people perform below average is that bad?

By not renting from them. A vacant house will pressure the rent downward. But this only works if there is a free market. If the regulations are limiting supply, prices will continue to go up.

No history at all. Do you have any undisclosed relationship? Hmm. My post was getting traction then suddenly its downvoted to the bottom. Maybe it was a social media management platform. Do you know anyone who runs one of those?

I get frustrated at the number of things ChatGPT gets blamed for that aren't its fault. It is completely understandable that if there are repos out on GitHub like the one for Phomber[1] thant ChatGPT would find that code and have no idea that it was phoney. Suggesting that ChatGPT just made this up out of thin air when you know it didn't is not very responsible.

1. https://github.com/s41r4j/phomber

I cannot think of any other reason why the new blog post wouldn't have mentioned the obvious connection to the earlier issues that they had. They want to make it seem like ChatGPT invented this use case but they know that the sample code that ChatGTP learned from was mentioned in their previous blog post.

Its not like ChatGPT made this up. There were pre-existing YouTube tutorials and python scripts available that used OpenCage an purported to do this. OpenCage even blogged about this problem almost a year ago[1].

Honestly it looks more like OpenCage is trying to rehash the same issue for more clicks by spinning it off the hugely popular ChatGPT keywords. Wouldn't be too surprised if they created the original python utilities themselves just to get some publicity by denouncing them.

1. https://blog.opencagedata.com/post/we-can-not-convert-a-phon...

I never meant that anyone was forced to sell, legally. Only that the economics forced them to sell at a different schedule or terms than they would have preferred.

I think most larger cities have rules against parking vehicles in a yard visible to the street. In the driveway is usually ok. And converting more of your yard into driveway is usually restricted by zoning as well.

A little game theory may come to play though. If the whole city booms and just my neighborhood stays single-family large lot, my price/sqft may increase drastically, and I may get better return on any improvements I do to my property based on my investment profile.

If instead my neighborhood is converted to apartments or high-density condos, I might not have the capital to take advantage of those opportunities but my single family house becomes undesirable in that zone. I am forced to sell to a developer in order to maximize return. I probably still make money, but it might be less then I could have made in the other scenario, and I am unable to use the house for my own residence up until the time I need to liquidate.

So its not necessarily illogical.

I feel that this is a common misconception by many language learners, and it is not their fault. Usually when we learn about a language in a non-organic setting, such as a classroom, we learn mostly about the "rules". But the rules are usually just generalizations that cover a large portion of usage, while the irregularities are often learned later or are segregated as "special" cases even though they are often the most common constructions. As a result I often hear people say things like, "this language has pure vowels," or, "this language has very consistent word order," but in fact it is mostly because some teacher emphasized the most regular forms, or the places where it contrasted from their native language.

I am not suggesting that all languages are equally irregular, or illogical. But I do think that many times the differences are exaggerated.

My tone apparently didn't come across well. I was in fact criticizing the use of the word hate in this context.

They obviously don't call it hate themselves. It is the opinion of certain trans groups that the positions taken by the organisation are based on hate. Of course hate in modern lingo just means disagreement, or failure to support the specific legislative agenda of a particular group.

LGB Alliance states that it believes many cases of transition are actually a form of therapy to remove gay-ness. That a gay person is led to believe they can be "straight" if they transition to the opposite sex. So in their view, transitioning is a form of homophobia, but in the view of trans groups, the LGB alliance is anti-trans. From the LGB Alliance webpage:

> Very many children, and quite possibly adults, enter the process of gender transition as a result of the homophobia of their parents, peer group, or their own internalised dislike of their sexual orientation. Young gay men or lesbians are being sold a myth that they can be straight, that lesbians are really straight men and that gay men are really straight women. This is homophobic conversion therapy.

Typically you just verify it by requesting a known name path like /allow-ddos-attacks.txt and it must contain a unique key generated for the account. Some have you add it as a special rule in /robots.txt

I wouldn't correct someone for saying "It's me" in most contexts. But I will step right in and defend the person who says "It is I" and is told she is wrong.

I will also add that myself is only for a few specific cases, primarily when the subject and object are the same:

I looked at myself in the mirror. She looked at me.

I have decided to just be myself. Kind of an odd case there.

I, myself, love to go to the movies. Here it is just used for emphasis, not as an actual reflexive pronoun.

Some people do use the reflexive pronoun as an object in certain cases, often with compound objects, but it is not proper under any prescriptive English grammar that I have studied.

The "brother and I" are a compound complement, not an object. Complements use the same form as the subject. Were is a form of "to be" which generally sees subject forms on both sides, such as "It is I".

The only one who got it right was I.

The only ones who got it right were he and I.

Well, I call my crypto BabyCoins, so when you confiscate them you are kidnapping right?

Then do it. Why does your activity in IT depend on what someone on the internet says? For the rest of us, multi-account setups offer a large number of advantages that outweigh the inconveniences and we have built tooling to deal with most of those anyway.