pythonaut_16

I looked at Dokku and Flynn for personal (single host) projects and find both to be too complicated for my needs. I generally prefer deploying Docker containers over Heroku buildpacks.

I ended up just running a single Digital Ocean droplet with Traefik as a loadbalancer/entry point, and then running each of my projects with docker-compose. (And building each project with Docker)

With Traefik I can set up reverse proxying for each project just by adding a few labels to its docker containers, and Traefik manages LetsEncrypt for me.

Kinda a cool idea in a Stargate-y, Ancient Astronauts kinda way.

It could easily be the origin of a story of the first interstellar star-ship from Earth traveling across the cosmos, only to reach a planet already inhabited by a human civilisation. (This would presume that knowledge of the traveler world was lost at some point)

I appreciate that your conclusion was that the starting position helps determine the strategy necessary for success, rather than your starting position already determining your ability to succeed.

A lot of comments in these kinds of threads just assume a kind of fatalism that success is determined purely by change and the circumstances of your birth.

And the flaw with your perspective is that if we all followed this advice, we might have a few highly polished bullet proof C libraries to use, but we'd still be stuck writing C and following all of its paradigms.

I'm not so sure it's that clear. (I'm not a lawyer)

If you can lawfully download a phone image over the internet while in the country and you can lawfully enter the country with no or limited digital information on your person then I don't see how backing up your phone in a different country (where New Zealand has no jurisdiction) and legally downloading the backup in New Zealand is evading customs.

Another (presumably) legal scenarios would include backing up all of your data, carrying no phone into the country, and then purchasing one while there. Is that "evading customs"?

> The good drone operators didn't get control over the bad ones

What does this even mean? I buy a drone and now I'm responsible to go hunt down every idiot with a drone and tell him to knock it off? I'm sure that would be very effective. Definitely much more effective than the FAA regulations already in place that these people choose to ignore.

I hadn't heard about Amazon using Stripe before.

Here's an article from 2017 talking about it: https://www.geekwire.com/2017/amazon-quietly-starts-using-st...

Basically yeah. You probably aren't gonna be adding rebasing functionality to your supply chain git repo.

But again, that's why I mentioned a blockchain in the true sense, as a chain of blocks containing a hash of previous blocks, because git is a blockchain by that definition.

I think there are two key points to making such a system work:

1. Packaging it in such a way that it's easy to use for non-technical users.

2. There still has to be a mechanism for establishing trust in the public keys registered in such a system.

For one I'd imagine that farmers are doing some amount of work to go from raw "lettuce in the ground" to "one unit of shipment". Once it's a unit of shipment it could have an ID/Bar/QRcode generated that is then scanned with a handheld scanner that has its own keypair. The scanners keypair would be registered with the farm and so the farm would either explicitly sign off on the package or implicitly have signed that scanners pair as trusted by the farm. So a farmer and farmstaff wouldn't need any technical know how beyond operating a scanner. Depending on the farm adding such a granular tracking system may or may not be easy to implement.

For two, I can see two options. Walmart could verify every step of the chain themselves and register/receive the public key for each step in the chain. (So a farm would register with Walmart as a verified producer, a shipping company would register, etc). Or each step of the change could make a binary decision to trust the step before it and apply pressure down chain to resolve issues, since theoretically each step could fabricate the entire chain before passing it off. In this scenario, Walmart would go to the shipping company and say "E. Coli was detected in Shipment X. We no longer want to be sourced produce from Producer Y. The shipping company then takes this into account when sourcing produce, or else Walmart discontinues business with them.

I think the big benefit is by having an associated public key, you can verify the claimed identity of any agent in the chain and build trust in that agent over time. You could keep popping up disposable proxy farms, but Walmart/Shipping provider/X doesn't have any reason to trust your proxy farm's shipments; you have to establish trust either directly with a buyer of your produce, or establish trust over time as a commodity provider. As you build trust you can probably get better prices.

I'm by no means a blockchain advocate or a supply chain manager of any kind, just doing a thought experiment of how blockchains might be effectively applied in such a scenario. There very well might be better solutions, but I think at the very least a blockchain presents an interesting or novel solution.

Just thinking through, you could also create a sort of "doubly linked list" and include who custody was given to as part of each block, so a farmer is signing a claim of who they gave their produce to. {Farm A produced unit of Lettuce X, Given to Shipper B, <no previous>}[Farm A signed]

I agree that it's a buzzword,

but at least intuitively, a signed blockchain (in the true sense that each block contains a hash of the previous block) does seem to confer some additional security over a plain database.

A plain database would give you a log of events and who logged them, but security and trust resides in the database and how it's authenticated. Anyone with sufficient permissions could modify the database.

A signed block chain would give you a log of events where each party in the chain signs the new block (which includes a hash of the previous block) using their private key. The block can then be verified using each entities public key. To modify this system you would need to be able to breach the trust of the private keys.

{Lettuce from Farm A on date, <>}[Signed by farm A] => {Received lettuce on date, <Farm A block>}[Signed by shipping agent] => {Received lettuce on data, <Shipping agent block>}[Signed by Walmart store], etc

In theory then, Walmart would have a registry of the public keys of each agent in the chain, and upon receiving produce could verify the events of the whole block?

Sounds more like a UI bug/oversight than intentional deception.

Google Maps UI has a feature to display your set home address, once you turn off tracking or whatever it no longer has access to that home address in its UI so the default state is to ask you to set one.

If that's the case then the real problem would be that the address data is siloed off somewhere in your Google account under maps and isn't accessible to be changed/cleared from your general account settings.

The extent the common person (might) know about cookies is that sometimes it's helpful to clear them to speed up your computer and/or as part of other magical rituals.

I'm curious what that does to discourse too. If there's no advertising allowed and users bid on one post per minute, what's to stop someone with deep pockets from dominating the system?

I do think bidding to post and rate-limiting is an interesting solution but it seems like there needs to be some kind of scaling mechanism.

Google went to production with Pentium desktops on shelves.

IIRC their original hardware plan was based around commodity hardware and getting the most performance per dollar since they built the crawler to be distributed pretty early on.

Point being, consumer grade hardware has come a long way since then, and if you're doing something cutting edge like DL it's not outlandish to expect that rolling your own might be worthwhile and totally justified.

That's fair but you can easily develop for the majority Chrome marketshare by focusing on designing and building your applications on top of the actual web standards instead of Chrome's specific implementations. Probably 95% of the APIs you use in a typical app will be easy to use in a standard way anyway.

WebRTC and some of the more mercurial APIs might be a challenge though.

The user isn't the problem, the developer is.

If you're developing against Chrome/Chromium, particularly "works in Chrome" instead of developing against the published Web standards, you're support Google & Chrome.

I would watch an AI-assisted human tournament, especially where each team is responsible for designing their own AI

You still didn't really answer what you think Mozilla should be doing with that money. (Besides vaguely hinting that they don't target power users anymore which suggests you're bitter about the switch to web extensions)

You can force cast a boolean by doing if(!!value == true) {}, but at that point you might as well just say if(value)

Let's be honest though, if someone's copy-pasting from Stack Exchange, they're probably not reading or understanding the whole thing they're copying either.

My rule in code reviews is if you're basing/copying something from the internet, you better be able to explain everything it's doing, and if you're pulling a dependency you better be able to explain why we need it and why you think it's trustworthy enough to put in our application.

Couldn't the thief pretty easily set up an account and call from a burner phone?

Firebase seems to be pretty integrated with Google's GCP strategy, as well as Android push notifications with FCM.

Not saying concern over Google's commitment to various tools is unfounded, but it seems that generally things that are tied into their core goals are pretty safe.

GCP is very important to Google, Inbox was an interesting UI built on top of Gmail.

I believe the running containers share the host's kernel, so maybe if you were doing certain low level kernel level stuff, maybe the version of the kernel matching would matter?

Is that similar to the functionality provided by Twist from Doist? It's not email based but it seems to be a hybrid of Email and Slack. I've only messed with it a few times and never with Google Wave, but it sounds similar to what you're describing.

It's not really supported, but you can run GUI programs with some amount of success by setting up X forwarding. Some programs work better than others, but I probably wouldn't want to run my code editor in it.

Which Elixir extension are you using for VS Code? Are you on Windows, Linux or Mac?

I've had the best luck with the ElixirLS extension on Linux but there are still a few weird things here or there.

In this case the article is talking about 24 MB of additional bandwidth used by the server to serve 100k pageviews using JWTS

We'll have to agree to disagree about Django. I think Django and Rails both offer good developer productivity/velocity, they just make different tradeoffs. Django tends to be more explicit, which might lead to a slightly higher learning curve, but after that I've found it's easier to trace through Django applications to understand what's happening.

I've seen my fair share of terrible Django and terrible Rails applications. Bad code can be written in any language and framework.

Don't get me wrong, Django definitely has its pain points, but I think it offers a very competitive alternative to Rails.

I definitely agree with you on Phoenix though! Elixir/Phoenix is my current stack of choice. I actually think they do a really great job of capturing the high points of both Rails and Django while also improving on the weak points of both as well. (For example, Phoenix offers a lot of the "magic" of Rails but it's all backed by explicit code that Phoenix generates while creating your project.)

> Root of all evil is state.

That's such a funny thing to say. You'd be hard pressed to have a program without state. Every program is made up of a combination of 3? components: logic, data(state), and time.

The thing that differentiates different programming languages and tools is what abstractions they build around those three things and how they are exposed to the programmer.

You might know Python but it sounds like you don't know Django very well.

Django does have built in JSON support[1]. There's also Django Rest Framework[2], which while not built into the core, is well supported and hardly a burden to add.

And finally, Django's "scaffolding" functionality is built around its models. You define your model as a plain Python class inheriting from Django's model class, and then the various generic[3]/"scaffolding" views work by being told what model they're for, with the ability to override and extend whatever you want to.

[1]-https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/2.1/ref/request-response/#...

[2]-http://www.django-rest-framework.org/

[3]-https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/2.1/topics/class-based-vie...