Jtsummers

> Israel and USA have been intent on invading Iran for decades. But they didn't. Then suddenly they did.

There is a war between the US/Israel and Iran, but there has not been an invasion. Attacks from a distance are not invasions. Contrast with the Russia-Ukraine war, where there actually has been an invasion.

Russia has demonstrated that they can conduct so-called "hybrid warfare" as long as it doesn't lead to serious injury or death and the response will be meager. But it still creates pain for those targeted nations.

Iran could be seeing that this approach, rather than more blatant attacks, is a useful way to create problems for the US's allies with a lower risk of elevating those US allies to direct enemies. The intention would be to get the US allies to put pressure on the US (in particular) to back out of the US/Israel war on Iran.

> Python is over 30 years old and it's going fine. You don't see people ragging on Guido everywhere.

Guido stepped down from that role 8 years ago. It now has a 5-member steering council along with the core developers as the primary maintainers and decision makers.

This is the size and sort of drones a unit would use for scouting the local area. The range isn't great, but it is suitable for that and less conspicuous than the gas-powered drones used 15 or so years ago and the buzzing quadcopters of today.

  7 = ⌈ 2.2 + 2 + 2⌉

Would still work.

Depends on the schools for networks. I attended a college that finished adding wired networks to their dorms in 2000 or so. It just wasn't a campus priority in the 90s, fewer students had computers back then. If it was a school with more money or an engineering school they got to it earlier, the rest added it when they added it.

no longer available

You're going to run that on a computer from the late 1980s or early 1990s? And how do you get the data onto those computers when they're not connected to a network, or the same network, as your other systems?

Cowards like them are why I quote comments. They claimed that Democrats (not in power at the time) blocked DOGE and that DOGE was actually going after corruption, both lies. Then they deleted it when called out.

> I already have zero trust in government due to the kind of corruption that DOGE was going after. But the Democrats shut that down.

DOGE never actually went after corruption, though, and only idiots ever believed that was their intention. They said they were pursuing savings by finding fraud, waste, and abuse and then ignored one of the biggest sources of all three: The DOD.

And then the Republicans decided that the remarkably efficient and perennially audit failing Pentagon should get an extra half trillion dollars. Largely to pursue contracts with companies owned by Musk, Thiel, Lucky, and other Trump inner circle types.

And how, by the way, did Democrats shutdown DOGE? Republican president, Republican Senate, Republican House. They controlled everything they needed to to continue operating DOGE. DOGE is squarely a Republican failure to do anything useful.

Vetoes can be overridden by Congress, though Republicans will have to vote with Democrats since the Democrats don't have a significant enough majority. And many of the surviving Republicans are going to have to evaluate how safe they feel given the recent election. Do they continue to fail their constituents and risk losing in 2028 to kowtow to a lame duck president, or do they actually do something worthwhile for their salaries and the trust that's been given to them.

Go to archive.is (or one of the other archive sites), paste in the URL you want to get an archive copy of, then copy the resulting URL and paste it here.

No. DOD still has a lot of air-gapped systems, some for legitimate reasons, and many out of momentum or lack of understanding of how networks work.

Useful aphorism in general, not terribly applicable in this case. Even if it had been tested regularly, it was cut around the same time the primary failed. Regular testing doesn't stop construction crews from cutting a line.

A more useful comment might have been to say something about the depth of the backup, having only one backup connection not being enough or something.

> Do they seriously not have a backup connection?

That was the backup connection. The primary failed, and concurrently the backup had been severed by a construction crew.

Fortunately the choice isn't between 1980s hardware with floppy disk requirements and rented servers in someone else's building. There are a lot of options in between those two.

I've worked on systems this decade that still relied on floppy disks. It's getting harder and harder for them to operate because the disks are getting rarer, as are the drives. And often the essential component is not the disk itself. There are some other computers in the system that cannot be upgraded to any more recent device, systems from the 1980s and 1990s that force them to continue using a floppy disk.

If it was just two modern computers and transferring data between them, the floppy disk would have been dropped in a heartbeat. But it's the old computers still in the critical path that are holding everything back. And those are really hard to maintain. Last year we phased out a system that was dependent on computers from the mid-1990s, getting replacement parts was practically impossible, they mostly just don't exist. You'd buy old systems off ebay and hope that they had enough working parts to scavenge, and the right working parts.

EDIT: Light editing because I had some extra words.

"Advanced persistent threat": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_persistent_threat

They're a troll, read their comment history. There's nothing of value in any of their comments, and they only post so they can stir up controversy. Flag and move on, stop feeding them.

What's the confusion? The US is a federated system, each state is responsible for determining and carrying out the punishments for crimes committed within that state. Some offenses will result in federal charges, in addition to or instead of state-level charges, so those sentences and punishments would be handled by the federal government instead. Prisoners charged with crimes at the state level will typically be held in prisons in that state. Prisoners convicted of a capital offense (one that can result in the death penalty) in some state will be held in a prison in that state on "death row" (colloquial term meaning a section of a prison dedicated to inmates sentenced to death).

The quoted bit is just literally saying that CA has more death row inmates than other states. That doesn't mean they sentence more people to death, a large part of the reason is that they haven't carried out an execution in 20 years. So the numbers will continue to grow instead of shrinking until the inmates die from some other cause (age, illness, suicide, etc.). This is in contrast to states like FL and TX that continue to carry out death sentences, so the numbers will grow as people get sentenced but shrink faster than in CA as they carry out the executions.

As a political move it's not a bad one. It saves the state money (eliminating the mandatory appeals), and it forces the pro-life fiscal conservatives who want to oppose it to explain that they're actually pro-death and in favor of spending more money, not less. Which puts them in a conundrum. Espouse their actual views and let their opponents use it against them, or stay quiet and irritate their constituents who want them to be in favor of executions (irrespective of the cost).

And all the while, it really changes nothing about the status quo of executions in the state, they weren't going to happen before this commutation, and they won't happen after.

I'm sure one of his agents could answer that question if you posed it to them.

If he actually had $1 trillion in cash, maybe. But he doesn't, the vast majority of his wealth is paper wealth. To spend that money he has to borrow, sell assets, or tap into whatever his cash reserve is.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47042593 - HN discussion (5 comments) on that particular rant of his. And it looks like you were one of the few people to comment on it, so really this is for other people who are missing the context of our comments.

https://garryslist.org/posts/mackenzie-scott-s-26-billion-su... - The rant itself.

A site where he complains about rich people being charitable, among other things.

"almost" was an important word in my comment. But yes, sometimes (as in not always) they don't get flagged or the mods remove flagging.

US politics almost always gets flagged here. The mods occasionally disable flagging for these discussions. Non-US politics are less likely to get flagged, though.

> I'm struggling to see where this disagrees with my earlier comment in even the most minor detail.

I was specifically responding to your earlier statement:

>> But there's not really a concept of 'actions' to go with parsing.

And pointing out that even the Dragon Book talks about associating actions with parsing by attaching them to production rules for the parser. You don't seem to accept the literal text of the book, and that's not something I can understand. But that's your choice.

That's normal browser behavior when you middle click on a link, and the images happen to be links. It's been decades since that behavior was adopted by most browsers.

> But there's not really a concept of 'actions' to go with parsing.

I'll appeal to authority here and quote from the Dragon Book:

>> Program fragments embedded within production bodies are called semantic actions.

In CS, particularly around compilers, it's an old concept.