- androidbishop parentKind of a funny coincidence that the english word for the ancient board game shares the same poor branding and searchability over the exact same word
- I'm reminded of Jack Donaghy on 30 Rock giving away his prized cookie jar collection to Kenneth, the only person he found that would appreciate it.
- Read "The Romance of Reality" by Bobby Azarian. It starts there and expands to cosmic levels.
- I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but I actually endorse these ideas
- That's a pretty far fetched interpretation of the 1st amendment. It doesn't say "one's religious beliefs supersede the laws enacted by congress". Having religious beliefs doesn't mean I can practice ritual human sacrifice, or sell bleach to people with promises that it cures cancer, or impregnate a harem of child brides. Freedom of speech isn't a get out of jail card either. Most criminal statutes involve speech of some kind. You are not free to commit fraud, to lie to law enforcement, to engage in a criminal conspiracy, etc.
- I'm all for magic mushrooms and legalization, but I don't buy this 1st amendment religious exemption bullshit. The law should apply equally to everyone and everything, or it ceases to have any meaning. It's the same as the Supreme Court carving out a religious exemption to the Civil Rights act. There's no good reason why people's woo-woo beliefs somehow changes whether the law applies to them or not. It's ridiculous.
- I think an inevitable but mostly untapped direction of research is to leverage biotechnology to manufacture materials to replace plastics, metals, chemicals etc., that either don't have renewable sources or can't be biodegraded back into source material. We can go even further and create new biological machines, bioengineered motors and computers and all kinds of shit scaled up from existing models in nature.
The technology of nature and life is far more advanced than anything we have conjured up ourselves, and the more we learn from it and harness it, the more we will be able to advance and evolve our technological progress without creating all the geopolitical and environmental problems that usually come with these advancements.
- I enthusiastically support this list
- very true
- I'm not sure you can. If it is possible, it probably requires some open-source tools and a pretty painful process to get the credentials off a hardware token (if that's even possible) and go through the various API calls.
Maybe there's something here?
- Same. These things are indestructible. LOSING a key, however, is totally in the cards.
- glutton ;-p
- Uh, what?
1. There are pretty damned good reasons to use a single sign on (SSO) authentication across all company resources. Managing multiple accounts for every employee across every service is a prohibitively burdensome and messy affair, error-prone, inconsistent in policy enforcement and quality of security, features that would difficult to roll out on your own, the list goes on. SSO is an absolute must in any modern organization.
2. WebAuthn just a marketing scheme? It's a pretty big jump forward in authentication security, protocol, user experience, etc. It eliminates passwords, the cornerstone of authentication for as long as computers have even had authentication, and the #1 cause for security breaches by far. It does away with the need for 2FA. It allows users to use a range of devices to easily authenticate themselves without the need to juggle credentials for every account they have. It uses public/private key cryptography, a robust standard for security for years, uniquely for each site, attested to prevent fake hosts from registering keys, and all automatically managed behind the scenes so nobody has to go through the painful song and dance of creating and managing their own keys anymore. And it does all of this with a universal and open protocol that is currently already baked into most browsers. Seems like a pretty big deal to me, and certainly a big enough deal for huge companies and services like Google, Github, Microsoft, etc. to have prioritized its development and rollout.
- Google was one of the earliest adopters of Yubikeys, and they used them for EVERYTHING. When I worked there, we always received 2 keys: one of those itty bitty ones that sits in your USB port permanently, and a regular key that fit into our security badge holder, or you could keep at home, or whatever. The switch to security keys reduced account takeovers to 0:
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2018/07/google-security-keys-neu...
- One of the reasons I got my degree in Biotechnology was because I realized that the technology of life is mind-bogglingly advanced and learning how it does things can have profound insights into how we solve other problems. The process of mutation and evolution is definitely a strong contender for this, maybe one of the most important and powerful.
- Considering the fact that you can inject python code blocks, I kind of doubt it. It also makes API calls that populates a dashboard with an inventory of resources created, so it seems to be more of an api wrapper like other IaC solutions.
- A rare opinion but one I share wholeheartedly. I started my career at Google Cloud but spent the rest of it working with AWS. AWS always feels like an uphill struggle, lots of micro management and resources that need to be duct-taped together. I'm lucky to have recently landed a Google Cloud gig and my God, things are so much easier and smoother now. It just seems better designed and integrated to me, albeit much fewer services to choose from if you don't buy into their ecosystem.
- Also pretty neat that there's a Terraform provider for Kubernetes native resources.
- This 1000%. Also recently discovered Google Deployment Manager is shit for the exact same reasons. I honestly don't get it.
- Terraform, and by extension HCL, is more powerful and flexible. It can be used across clouds. It has providers for all kinds of things, like kubernetes. It can be abstracted and modularized. It supports cool features like workspaces and junk, depending on how you want to use it.
Also recently I was forced to use Google Cloud Deployment Manager scripts for some legacy project we were migrating to Terraform, and I was shocked at how buggy and useless it was. Failed to create resources for no discernible reason, couldn't update existing resources with dependencies, couldn't delete resources, was just unfathomably shit all around. Finished the Terraform migration earlier this morning and everything went off without a hitch, plus we got more coverage for stuff Deployment Manager doesn't support. It's also organized much nicer now, with versioned modules and what-have-you.
Cloudformation is ugly and again, surprisingly isn't well supported by AWS. I don't understand how it's possible, but terraform providers seem to be more up to date with products and APIs. Maybe that's just me but I've seen others complain about the same thing.
- When I was homeless in LA, the heat was unbearable, and there was precious little shade anywhere. My only respite was public libraries, which are free, air conditioned, quiet, have restrooms, water fountains, and loaded with free entertainment and education. I spent nearly every day there.
- 6. We need to research and fund more effective substance abuse treatment. There is a surprising dearth of evidence-based treatment programs out there. Having gone through a few court-mandated programs myself, I cannot express enough how useless these were. Show up to a few meetings, watch some ludicrous after-school scared-straight specials, attend a number of NA meetings listening to junkies relate the same rock bottom stories over and over, the occasional piss test (which either didn't even test for the drugs I was on or could be beat by staying clean for just a few days) and probably the only helpful thing: community service. The most effective experience I had getting clean wasn't even a drug program at all: living at a yoga commune for several months as part of their volunteer program. Something about living away from regular life, with a variety of people (not just users), having all my basic needs met, meditating and doing yoga every day, living simply and having jobs to do around the compound, in a totally non judgemental or condescending atmosphere free of conversations that constantly focused on drugs or addiction, really helped me reset. Maybe that only works for me, I don't know what works for other people, but there might be something to that experience that can be applied to other programs as well.
- As a fairy heavy drug user, I feel I should chime in since it appears most of the comments here are coming from "normies" whose experience with users seems to be limited to homeless street addicts or family/friends who fell apart.
1. There are far more users out there than you realize. Almost all of my friends use, they all live normal lives and you wouldn't know it unless you actively partied with them. There are vast swaths of society that aren't opiate or meth addicts, but partake in coke, ketamine, psychedelics, mdma, etc regularly without consequence. You just aren't seeing it.
2. Anyone who hasn't been through the criminal justice ringer for drugs likely does not fully appreciate how devastating it can be. In most cases it does not contribute positively to a person's life, can hinder future employment, can cost a person their job, their livelihood, their housing, their kids, etc., for what was likely a victimless crime. Decriminalization, within reason, is a moral imperative. Full legalization, with regulation, is the only way to effectively deal with the problem in its entirety, from supply on down, the same as it was with alcohol.
3. Using drugs is a personal choice that people should be free to make, the same as using alcohol (a drug as debilitating, toxic, addictive, etc as most illegal drugs), or scuba diving, or skydiving, or any other high risk activity that we tolerate. Like the latter activities, you can implement licensing requirements such as mandatory education and fees to fund abuse treatment programs. Legalizing it across the board will mandate safe and responsible supply, and remove the criminal organizations from the equation. Again, look at what happened with alcohol prohibition and its eventual legalization. It is the EXACT same as what we are experiencing with drugs.
4. Because it is entirely possible to use drugs responsibly, its use in and of itself should not be the focus of criminal enforcement. It is bad behavior that is the issue, and like alcohol, we can criminalize it. Driving drunk, public intoxication, child endangerment, domestic abuse, assault, property damage, etc are all problems we have with drunks, and all are criminalized respectively. There is no reason why we can't do the same with drugs.
5. Addiction is a serious issue. But it is a public health issue, and should be treated as such. Turning addicts into criminals is just making a difficult situation worse. These people are sick, they should get help. We also need to serious expand programs for the homeless, as the housing problem is what drives a lot of what you see on the streets.
- Wow, legalizing across the board and requiring licensing was the idea I had. Force some kind of education requirements, pay into funds to provide treatment, and revoke licenses for those that abuse the privilege. This is what we do for other high risk activities like driving, skydiving, scuba diving, etc., it just makes sense to do it for drugs. This list is fantastic, it should be shouted across the nation. You have my vote.
- I find myself torn between my STEM-educated skeptic mind and my numerous DMT-induced visits to hyper-reality and communication with unfathomably advanced hyper-dimensional beings mind. I find it difficult to accept that these experiences were just the products of my own subconscious or imagination, as they were far beyond the capabilities of my wildest dreams and just felt too real, too alien, and too consistent. There has been some recent breakthroughs by Andrew Gallimore that have allowed researchers to extend the DMT experience indefinitely via the DMTx project, and the first trials have been completed by a group of serious researchers, all PhDs. They report extended contact with hyper-dimensional aliens/beings, on numerous sessions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Myq_Hc_39aI&t=1898s
Now, I find it difficult to believe there isn't a plethora of intelligent life out there in the universe. There are just far too many star systems. I also find it difficult to believe that any have to come to visit. There is no evidence to support it, and think about it: the time, energy, and technology required to travel the vast expanse of space to reach Earth are unimaginably huge. And if they had that kind of technology, it would seem unlikely that they would routinely crash once they got here. Furthermore, we've only been producing radio waves for a short period of time, nowhere near long enough to signal a remote civilization that we're even here (I'm not sure our radio waves would even be detectable at those distances). And why would they even want to? At that level of sophistication, we would be nothing more than ants to them. Bacteria in a petri dish.
Yet, even we, as humans, spend a lot of effort researching ants. And bacteria, in petri dishes. And if the collective DMT community's experiences are to be believed, and we have contacted and communicated with advanced alien intelligences, they usually seem to be quite interested and curious about us too. This is a huge leap, but maybe the universe isn't what it seems. It could be data, data that could be manipulated from outside the confines of the simulation. Or, maybe there are higher dimensions of reality, that we are currently (mostly) incapable of detecting from our vantage point. Maybe the aliens exist in higher dimensions, and use these UFOs as lower dimension probes, that don't have to travel vast distances of space because they don't originate from other star systems. Maybe they crash because they're SUPPOSED to be found, maybe they want us to reverse engineer them to learn something, to accelerate our technological and scientific advancement.
Or maybe it's all poppycock. Maybe we're the first species that will possibly achieve interstellar transportation, and it will us that are the aliens visiting other primitive worlds. Only time will tell.
- you can use yubikey 5s as passkeys
- yubikeys (5) can be used as passkeys
- Not only are his novels absolutely beautiful masterpieces, but he also wrote a collection of essays in The Curtain and The Art of the Novel that are fascinating insights into art and writing that I highly recommend.
- same reason I use cardinal directions when giving directions, I'm guessing
- I'm still waiting on an actual argument here other than condescending name calling, appeals to authority (yes that is what you are doing), and casual hand-waving away any serious discussion because it doesn't "deserve" it.
Let's go through the points which I was referring to:
"Python doesn't have a package manager. pip can install packages, but installing packages iteratively will break dependencies of packages installed in previous iterations. So, if you call pip install twice or more, you are likely to end up with a broken system."
"Likely" seems like a stretch here since it's pretty damned rare that I've come across this when using virtual environments. With a virtual environment, you have an isolated system. Why are you installing packages iteratively in the first place? Use a requirements.txt with the packages you need, then freeze it. If you end up with a conflict, delete the virtual environment and recreate a fresh one, problem solved.
"Python cannot deal with different programs wanting different versions of the same dependency"
It does when you're running your applications using virtual environments. Again, you say that it's irrelevant, but this is literally what this shit solves. I come from a world where multiple applications are run on separate docker containers so this doesn't really apply anyway, but if you had to run multiple applications on the same server you can set the PYTHONPATH env variable and venv binary to the virtual environment when running each application.
"Python version iterates very fast. It's even worse for most of the Python packages. To stand still you need to update all the time, because everything goes stale very fast. In addition, this creates too many versions of packages for dependency solvers to process leading to insanely long installation times, which, in turn, prompts the package maintainers to specify very precise version requirements (to reduce the time one has to wait for the solver to figure out what to install), but this, in turn, creates a situation where there are lots of allegedly incompatible packages."
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are saying here, but this seems like a retread of your first point with some casual opinions thrown in. If you delete the venv and re-install all the packages at once, shouldn't it resolve dependency issues? "Insanely long installation times"? Seems to be a lot quicker than maven or gradle in my experience, and much easier to use. I get a lot of dependency issues with those managers as well, so this doesn't seem to be a unique problem for python, if it really is a problem when using virtual environments.
"Python package maintainers have too many elements in support matrix. This leads to quick abandonment of old versions, fragmented support across platforms and versions."
I admit I don't know anything about this. Maybe it's true, but I imagine this is true for community packages of just about any language.
"Python packages are low quality. Many Python programmers don't understand what needs to go into a package, they either put too little or too much or just the wrong stuff altogether."
This is not only purely subjective opinion, it's not even one that seems to be common. Maybe that's true for less popular packages (and again, I'm not convinced it wouldn't be the same for less popular packages in other languages), but the ones most people use for common tasks I often see heralded as fantastic examples of programming that I should be reviewing to level up my own code.
"All of the above could've been solved by better moderation of community-generated packages, stricter rules on package submission process, longer version release cycles, formalizing package requirements across different platforms, creating tools s.a. package manager to aid in this process..."
I'm not familiar enough with the politics, culture, and process of maintaining Python's packages or package management system to speak to any of this. It seems like this would generally be good advice regardless of the state it's currently in. But these are broad, systemic solutions that require a revamp of the culture and bureaucracy of the entire package management system, a completely different set of tools than the ones that already exist (that would likely create backwards incompatibility issues), and no meaningful way to measure the success of these initiatives because most of your complaints are subjective opinions. Furthermore, at least half of your complaints seem to already be mitigated using virtual environments and industry best-practices, so I'm struggling to see where any of this is helpful.