TIL evolution is bad at deleting legacy code

Yeah one time I traveled to Europe and everyone was just running everywhere. Very efficient.

Technology is great to discuss because it’s just logic and facts and objective arguments. But bring in politics and it becomes a mess and that’s the problem with this divide in the privacy community.

Good post in general, but I disagree with this in particular. All technology is political. Not in a Democrat/Republican way but in a “how do we distribute resources within society?” way. Not to mention a big selling point for privacy tools is that they can be used by political dissidents. I think a problem does arise when a community manages to fool itself into believing it’s apolitical when what it’s really done is develop an orthodoxy to shut down political discussion.

The alphas in question

I think this is more of a truism within standup comedy that’s leaked out into being general advice. It can be offputting for a standup comedian to laugh at all their own jokes but even then there’s exceptions to the rule.

American

savings or investments

I don’t understand

Can someone explain what the problem is?

Can’t wait for deregulation to result in a tech bro reinvesting his Facebook money into an Uber But For Psychedelics startup that incentivizes mixing 9% more sawdust into my shrooms to maximize yield

Combo Class is a neat math education channel where things are often on fire or falling apart in the background in a way that’s fascinating on top of the math itself

Side note, I have no idea how many subscribers counts as obscure. It seems relative to the size of the niche. Or maybe I have no idea how big people are relative to how much I care about them. Like I would expect Ben Levin (music theory and production creator) to be closer in subs to Adam Neely (same) but he’s an entire order of magnitude lower. Like is CJ The X (video essayist) obscure enough at 341K subs?

Okay but I wanna know the findings of the study

“Oh, they print in that order? That’s weird.”

I did both of these at once last week.

Added a breakpoint. Debugger didn’t break.

Added an echo "here";. Debugger didn’t print.

Added a throw new Exception('fuck');. Debugger didn’t throw.

Stepped through. Debugger wouldn’t let me step in.

It took me almost an hour to realize it wasn’t the debugger’s fault and that a variable I thought was guaranteed to be truthy at that point was actually falsey due to upstream changes in a spreadsheet parser. I felt kind of stupid for not trusting the debugger at that point.

Science inherently involves the reproduction of work that’s already been done. That’s how the process ensures reproducibility. Talking about the efficiency of science makes very little sense because the savings bought by science are privatized, viewed like externalities.

Rhizomes stay winning

Put Netanyahu, Assad, Erdogan, Khamenei and their cabinets and top people from Hezbollah in Hague then we can talk.

So what you’re saying is Assad must go?

Now if he could start making cuts to the military…

Thank god

In the way that’s common in languages like Java where you’re making a property read-only, yes. But there’s a whole protocol in Python called descriptors where you can override the . on a field. The most common form of these is class methods annotated with the @property annotation, which makes it so the method can be accessed as if it were a property.

Yeah. I can understand the use case when it’s something relating to keeping simple state in sync by replacing it with derived state. But this particular case was flushing a cache after each get, which made each get of the property non-deterministic based on the class’s state.

I helped a friend debug a script last week that was working inconsistently in really weird ways. I looked at the script and it was all event hooks littered with sleep calls. I told him he was basically fuzz testing his own script and then getting surprised when he found race conditions. Shit was wild. Also, sometimes getters in Python are a mistake.