Smithalicious

If nation states are dogs, then the EU is the parrot: loud, proud, and not a dog.

I'm not an expert but I'm pretty sure the definition of "straight cunts" is that they aren't turned on by lesbians.

Okay, but the Jews were already being regularly persecuted for actual millennia at that point, and this was in... the 1930s, with a very different geopolitical situation. On the other hand, I doubt GP has any real reason to fear imminent ethnic persecution. We can and should take our best guess as to the likelihood of catastrophic events into account in our cost/benefit analysis, surely?

The laws of gravity are entirely symmetric, so it doesn't seem fair to attribute it specifically to the sun; also, the energy in this case is coming out of the "v" in earth's good old 0.5mv^2 kinetic energy relative to the sun.

I don't think "smol pp" is meant to be unfriendly to women, but it's telling that men are expected to self-police such utterly innocuous jokes when women are present even though you couldn't find a phrase less applicable to women if you tried.

Our language? Whose language is that, person in the link aggregator comment section of someone else's blog post?

That's why I refuse to take blue whales on in chess

Surely it's not stupidiif it works?

Up until the word "to" this comment seemed headed for a much darker ending.

Well if you ever need help processing this, remember not to ask 4o!

As far as I remember this disclaimer has only been on /b/, but yes, I love the turn of phrase. I think I used it in conversation within the last day or two, even.

If you want to make random claims sound probable, just punctuate them with "Science."

Girls are having sex with 1000 guys a day and some people clearly still aren't getting any... Inequality in theUUK is even worse than I thought :(

Surprised you hadn't heard it before, my peer group uses it a lot, also in the sense of "well that was something".

Exactly which platforms will penalise namedropping Hitler varies and it varies by circumstances, but this is a real thing as far as I can tell, on tiktok and also on YouTube videos algorithmically flagged as "intended for children" (regardless of whether they are or not).

Wow, I didn't actually think weed could give someone brain damage, but I guess I've just been conclusively proven wrong!

But this doesn't prevent SQL injection, does it? It adds a grammar feature that you can then use to build SQL injection prevention following a novel idiom. Someone still needs to write the actual SQL building logic somewhere!

I don't think this is the right idiom for doing this. Frankly I don't think SQL query generation should look like string templating at all!

The sell seems to be "now you can write code that looks like an SQL injection vulnerability, without it actually being vulnerable!". I'd rather write code that isn't a vulnerability, and doesn't look like one, and doesn't have to bend the language grammar either.

It's a pattern moreso than this specific feature. There's an important qualitative distinction for me between something that's on the level of a library (even if it's the stdlib) on the one hand and first class features (ie things that require parser level support) on the other.

Python has historically been very conservative about this but in recent years has had one controversial language extension after another, while parts of the language that actually need love are left to languish IMO.

I wanna be very clear that this is me changing my mind -- I was (still am) very on board with the highly controversial assignment expressions ("walrus operator") for instance.

I don't have much faith about what the Python language will look like if you project the current rate of changes forward 10, 15, 20 years. It really doesn't help that I consider this new thing an active antifeature.

I really was on the side of being generally willing to accept new python features, but this is getting ridiculous. What an utterly pointless thing to bloat the language with. At this point my moving to clojure as my first line language of choice is only accelerating.

This is of the category "things I wouldn't want to use even for the specific hyper niche things they're intended for". What even does a "t-string" represent? Because it's clearly not a string of any kind, it's a weird kind of function call notation. The programmer sees something that looks like string formatting, but the program executes some arbitrary procedure that might not return a string whatsoever.

I'd pivot my face deep into an industrial vat of sulfuric acid long before my financial reality can shift enough to make me start talking like that.

I'm glad I'm encouraged to "inject just the right amount of humanity", but I think I'd prefer to inject just the right amount of lead into my cranium.

>What if we were sensitive to the 200 to 500nm range?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-RfHC91Ewc

I assume the "per 100 women" part suffices to regress towards the mean

I agree with all of these broadly, though I've never run into a case where sleep doesn't work fwiw, but people are also really blind to how many warts windows has. Multi monitor stuff is a shitshow there too for instance, or Windows Update, or... I haven't personally used Windows for well over a decade but I have loved ones who do and I would say as of recent years we really have crossed over to where Windows has more shit like this than Linux I reckon.

I wish X supported mixed DPI per monitor, ugh.

I will say one notable difference is that Linux issues as a rule at least are debuggable, whereas Windows issues can just be utterly intractible. It's not that rare for me to watch friends with computer science degrees frustratedly embark on the long misadventure that is "reinstalling Windows".

Tigger

Won't somebody think of the billionaire IP holders? The horror.

I'll be honest, y'know the hotel, the shop across the street has a suit I wanna try on.

Just swallow it. Perpetuating the myth that gum is not safe to swallow with this "it's made of PLASTIC and CHEMICALS" fearmongering is just proliferating the actual cause of people spitting their gum everywhere, which is being taught not to swallow it.

How significant is "in the blast radius of an oil refinery"? Once every how many years should I expect a typical oil refinery to explode? This really doesn't seem like it should be their first, second, fifth, or twelfth priority to"solve".

EDIT: asking Claude:

Based on historical data, major refinery explosions in developed countries might occur at a rate of approximately 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 2,000 refinery-years of operation. Using this very rough estimate, a single refinery might have approximately a 50% chance of experiencing a significant explosion somewhere between 700-1,400 years of continuous operation.

It seems to me like green fundamentalist see nothing but enemies and subterfuge everywhere. Hydrogen, biofuel, nuclear, switching from oil to natural gas where possible, the list goes on.

I don't have enough of an opinion to comment on anyone of them individually, but I notice a really striking pattern where every time the idea of alternative energy sources are brought up that are not wind or solar, whoever brings it up is accused of sabotaging the energy transition in some way or another.