881 karma · joined June 9, 2013
One has to wonder why would we not choose a treatment(3-12 months, depending on the person/situation) since it can demonstrably help people recover completely from opioids and instead choose life-long dependence on particular drugs.
Are these the same scientists that think prescribing Vicodin, as if it's aspirin, is a good thing?
Unfortunately it was a no-go for me for the following reasons, but the situation may have been improved since then:
1) Back then it was only recently that they had instituted package signing and verification for their official packages. Ouch! That was something that most distros had for years back then. So security wasn't their primary concern.
2)There were 2 or 3 package managers. pacman was the one, don't remember the others and I didn't understand their purpose.
3)They were touting abundance of packages, but these were mostly AUR packages. AUR packages, back then at least, were completely unvetted, arbitrary packages provided by... anyone basically. And the official Arch documentation was crystal clear that they don't support them and that the user, individually, should inspect each one for their integrity or possible malicious intentions. Uh, no thanks.
Hope the situation has improved because I was planning to give it one more try at some point.
But I am just stating facts.
> at some point methadone might get de-prioritised
But that is wishful thinking, not reality. Open-ended programs do not work. Period.
By far most people in such programs relapse multiple times. You can't expect from the addict to kick the drug off out of sheer will and good intentions.
> took intelligent pro-active steps to move their lives forward
You don't understand addiction and how it works. It has nothing to with intelligence or logic. When someone chooses an open-ended program is because the people around them force them to take some action and they choose the easiest one.
Again, no one is judging and no one said those people do not need love, quite the opposite. But open-ended programs destroy their lives.
The answer is: never.
Only if they get into a program that guarantees they will be detoxified in 6 months(or so). This is rare unfortunately because it needs the addict's consent, which is rarely given. They usually choose the "open-ended" program because it's easier.
They only use methadone because it's a legal(but controlled) drug. It's not that much better than heroin.
It's not Roku that makes you jump through all those hoops for spotify, but spotify itself.
https://support.spotify.com/us/listen_everywhere/on_tv/roku/
It does through Plex
Not at a 135-characters length :)
And I'm not even accounting for the 1-char useless var/func names.
EDIT: To clarify, I don't think that the above "1 liner" has anything to offer. 1) It's not pythonic, 2) it's not 1-liner by any of python's standards and 3) it's a bad example of programming.
While on the other hand there are numerous other 1-liners that do not have these bad traits.
Thankfully he didn't follow your advice, hence he revolutionized every domain he touched.
You really should read more about his contributions to various disciplines.
Personally I would recommend it to any KDE fan.
This builds up my confidence in their tech, so much so that even though I had no real reason to try this new DB, I'm gonna find one! :D
I would be very wary of companies that can't perform because physical attendance is mandatory every single day!
So basically they conned people into a walled garden without providing any of the benefits they explicitly(or implicitly) promised.
As long as they get 30% of fart apps, who cares, right?
How many apps have you downloaded and how many are actually useful to you?
Around 2011-2013, I used on my work(office) machines Ubuntu while I continued to have Fedora on my laptop.
Fedora not only did it have more recent packages, it was so much more stable than ubuntu that it was incomparable.
In general I find Ubuntu as the most unstable distro one could use :/
Also, dist upgrades are a bit unnecessary when you can have your /home in a separate partition and do a fresh install of the newer Fedora version in a couple of minutes.
On the other hand, although I understand your need, keeping the /home in a different partition and just installing the next Fedora release every 13 months does the job for the most part. And the installation(from a USB) is not more than 15-20 minutes.
Pretty much every popular distro has this experience nowadays. Fedora(as a sibling poster mentioned) is indeed one of them and may I add, at least, twice as stable.
Why is Ubuntu the defacto supported Linux distro? Why is,quite often, steam so difficult to install, while it's a breeze to install on Ubuntu?
You can't expect people to consider you as a legitimate target if you're constantly moving :(
I can't say bad things about it, except that it's quite often that you can't find packages for various applications. A random example would be spotify, that was one of my last adventures to make it work(I got tired and gave up after a while).
And Fedora/RH has a lot more momentum in general and you can be certain that it will be around for as long as Linux is a thing I guess :)
Suse has gone through various struggles and it doesn't inspire much confidence to me anymore.
I've been using Fedora for the last 7-8 years, but I have to upgrade every 13-14 months or so. And CentOS is not suited for a modern development/workstation environment.
When you encapsulate most of your operations under POST you basically create your arbitrary protocol. No assumptions can be made about your service. You can make your own assumptions about your own service, but the others can't.
> That would be a fine protocol, and totally REST compatible. What's the problem exactly?
The problem would be that it wouldn't be REST compatible. You should clearly read a few books on the subject. Friendly advice, not a snarky comment.
REST already has idempotent mutating operations, like PUT and DELETE. It's not just GET that's idempotent. So clearly the problem is that you redefine your own protocol, with your own semantics, even though we already have plenty of standardized methods/response codes.
> If there's actually something wrong with that, then lay it out.
You have obviously missed a ton of bibliography on the subject. Before reading random blog posts from random people who have their arbitrary assumptions about what REST is, I'd suggest reading a few books on the subject.
Honestly sorry if I sound snarky, but after 10 years on working with such APIs, and after reading countless books on the subject, it never ceases to amaze me how people still think that GET and POST are enough. But I don't blame you, but the browsers who basically broke the protocol by just using those 2.
I can do you one better. If you managed to reduce everything down to GET and POST here's an idea; just use POST for everything. Boom. You just re-invented SOAP.
OK, I get what you're saying. Problem is that as far as I can see REST is perfect for S3-like services, Maps(?) and slightly more than basic CRUD applications.
You are bound to discover its limits very soon. The gazillions of books and blogposts out there heralding it as a serious interface are not helping either.
BTW, I don't know about other people criticizing, I am definitely not a purist. But after ~10 years of dealing with REST in various capacities(startups to Enterprises), I am a bit tired and can't wait for something to replace it.
How many browsers do you have? 3-5?
How many REST client libraries are there?
Answer: one per service(per programming language).
What kind of protocol is that?