2. WTForms is not the only way to do CSRF tokens with Flask
My point is that it’s not plausible to infer with certainty that some large part of Flask users would not have CSRF tokens just because Flask has more downloads than Flask-WTF
430 karma · joined September 22, 2018
2. WTForms is not the only way to do CSRF tokens with Flask
My point is that it’s not plausible to infer with certainty that some large part of Flask users would not have CSRF tokens just because Flask has more downloads than Flask-WTF
The solution is not to inhibit freedom of thought and speech, it is to teach new generations of people to be more critical.
Ultimately in the long run democracy and free societies are always more likely to triumph against authoritarian societies, because the will of the people prevents the governments from endlessly doing moronic or corruptive actions. If they do, they will get voted out in the next election cycle. Authoritarian governments don’t have that luxury, if the glorious leader decides to run against a wall year after year in full speed because they think they are right, they will and nobody dares to stop the train.
So the enemy is not disinformation, it is the gullible mind. We need to educate critical thinking, without going too deep into values. Then our societies will sort this shit out.
On a tangent, when a political entity is dismantling education of critical thought and science in school systems, you should know it’s because they know their political rule depends on people not thinking critically.
According to Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, an additional 4 cases per 100k men under the age of 30.
They also note that having covid is a risk factor for myocarditis. So perhaps still worth it to take the shot.
Possibly they are doing this to put out the antivax wildfires in social media by reacting to statistical information about risks. So as to show that when there are scientifically established risks, there will be reaction to that as well.
Another, probably more common reason that people often don’t think about is that a participant of such conversation may have searched for said product, or be otherwise profiled for it, and you might get the ad because Big Ad knows you are related to them. For example FB doesn’t need to know the contents of your Whatsapp or FB messenger messages to know how close you are to someone: how often you message, how many messages, when etc
A lot of people think that the governmental reactions are slow and lame because covid isn’t a disease morbid enough to threaten civilization, as something like a full blown ebola pandemic for example could be. Which is probably true to extent.
But I agree 100% with you and people are crazy to think that governments would somehow suddenly be competent in handling a worse disaster than covid, given the complete (almost) worldwide failure to curb this plague. From initial downplaying and silencing scientists and doctors in China, to rise of anti-mask and anti-vaccine crowds and even voices in governments, to our incapability as a global world to handle the production and logistics of the vaccinations... when a disaster worse than covid strikes in the future, it will be the same shitshow, only with higher stakes
We slaughter 80 billion animals each year for food. On a planet of 7 billion humans, each year. Those animals only purpose is to be born, get fat, and get eaten by humans. Mostly in horrible conditions because it's cheap. We need to look into the mirror for more than just cosmetics industry.
https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production#number-of-animals...
On Earth, there was a lot of primordial soup, and there were a lot of chemical reactions. On a span of millions of years, complex data structures (such as RNA) may have occurred constantly somewhere on the planet. Every now and then, a cell randomly formed. Sometimes prokaryotes with RNA formed, like weird things in Conway's game of life. And then maybe once upon a time, a cell with just the right RNA to make it be able to reproduce in the ooze formed.
That or life on Earth is panspermic and we have skipped the pre-prokaryotic evolution altogether
- it cannot be detected the way you detect your phone in your hand or see light so your definition of detection seems to escape the basic premise of dark matter: its ability to avoid electromagnetic force, and also,
- we have detected it through gravitational anomalies
1. Microservices do not have some inherent property of having to duplicate data. You can have data in single source and deliver that data to anyone who needs it through an API. There are infinitely many caching solutions if you are worried about this becoming a bottleneck
2 and 2.5. There are tools for microservice architectures that counter these problems to a degree, mainstream example being containers and container orchestration (e.g. Docker and Kubernetes). One can even make an argument that microservices force you to build your systems so they are more robust than your monolith would be. If the argument for monoliths is that it's easier to maintain reliability when every egg is in one basket then you are putting all your bets into that basket and it becomes a black hole for developer and operations resources, as well as making operations evolution very slow
3. There are again tools for handling data and "syncing" (although I don't like the idea of having to "sync") the services, for example message queues / streaming processing platforms (e.g. Kafka). If some data or information might be of interest to multiple services, you should then push such data to a message queue and consume it from services that need it. The "syncing" problem sounds like something that arises when you start duplicating your data across services which shouldn't happen (see my argument on 1.)
Again not to say microservices are somehow universally better. Just coming into defense of their core concepts when they get unfairly accused
For most people plant-based diet is probably completely safe and when debating this issue, the bottom argument of opposition to plant-based diets usually boils down to one thing: the god-given right or even necessity for man to eat other animals (be it because of it being natural to eat other beings in nature, because "plants have feelings too", or because of traditions or humans dying if they don't eat meat). This rests on ignorance of science, self-centered attitude and violence. Industrial-scale animal production for food is an abhorrent machine by any humane moral standards and most people use these counter-arguments because they like how meat or cheese tastes and they want to close their eyes.
Hunting or fishing or growing your own meat is much less evil than the animals-for-food industry but the nature ecosystem could never sustain current amounts of meat consumption. Also it has to be understood that in developing countries masses of people cannot afford to be fancy about what to eat and what not. In developed countries however... I think we should not consider ourselves "developed" if we kill 10x our own human populations amounts of animals each year for food based mostly on the fact that we are used to it and that meat tastes good. As more and more people realize this, the demand for plant-based diets goes up.
If a couple of bytes of information every now and then is too expensive to fetch with Starlink in poorer countries, it is too expensive to use for normal internet use for normal people anywhere on the planet.
Since you are using normal internet except for fetching the IPs, you are not subject to government snooping or sabotage any more than you would be normally. It also would require normal people at maximum the same level of tech-savvyness as a VPN to just connect to Starlink for a second.
Another key difference would be that a VPN requires you to reach the VPN server somehow, and the country can arbitrarily block cable traffic if they have the resources and will. Whether it's technically feasible for most VPNs is another question. But anyway, for Starlink... You would really need to wreck their satellite off the orbit or mess with their radiosignals to block it.
Not that social media companies would do anything to piss off authoritarian leaders / oppressing governments. But they could if they thought it's right
At least they seem to have had a lot of marketing folk that were laid off shortly after the IPO