no-s

40 ms·

241.
by no-s 6y ago
>> It's fascinating to watch, for example, people commenting on Facebook about vehicles driving too fast in winter conditions, endangering other road users. But those same Facebook commenters will say that nobody can order them t
242.
by no-s 6y ago
>> Right now medical systems in a lot of the country are exceeding capacity and turning away patients who would normally be hospitalized or treated due to the impact COVID-19 is happening. Does this account for the dynamic aspect of c
243.
by no-s 6y ago
>>Here speaks the voice of bitter experience. ;0) Hear! Hear! It's another mystery of capitalism! People screw up majestically, band-aid it, and still they make money. I'm not complaining, btw, having made plenty on the phen
244.
by no-s 6y ago
>>A divorce? I don't think that's going to work. Who gets custody of Wisconsin? Some warlord from Michigan?
245.
by no-s 6y ago
>>Whaaaa 100+ columns? How often do you need to add 100 columns to an existing table? >>I mean honestly that has to be as rare as chicken teeth. Haha, and yet it happens. One of the worst databases I ever dealt with was some rid
246.
by no-s 6y ago
I think the CHECK CONSTRAINT is explicit and intentional WRT data validation. However it does not make a different type out of the value. I don't really think there is a one-size-fits-all for this problem anyway. The real problem expre
247.
by no-s 6y ago
>>That’s a bad idea: that pushes the burden of data validation entirely on your client or application code. Textual column lengths should be used to enforce sanity checks on data. It just doesn't work out that way in practice. Fo
248.
by no-s 6y ago
>>You can pry SQL out of my cold dead hands. Its just not that bad. I often joke that SQL is the COBOL of the 21st century. HHOS. There's worse things...e.g. COBOL. Actually it's very difficult to deny the empirically discer
249.
by no-s 6y ago
>> But most of the awful SQL I’ve seen over my career hasn’t come from poor mastery of SQL, it’s come from poorly normalized schemas. If you have a properly normalized schema, then you can do a huge amount with very simple SQL. When i
250.
by no-s 6y ago
>> but one of the reasons for the cheap labor junior guy is to run to home depot. And then get the wrong stuff, which the contractor will make do anyway if there's even the remote possibly it will work. and so on. After a while a
251.
by no-s 6y ago
>>IMO the catch and release is because they're fishing for the ones they can make the strongest legal case for federal jurisdiction. or maybe its just a subterfuge. maybe the catch and release was to disguise interaction with con
252.
by no-s 6y ago
>> The performance cost of an extra index for insert/update/delete queries is only a concern when you get to the point where you do need to manually manage indexes - but for most database tables with less a few million rows
253.
by no-s 6y ago
>> usually joining half dozen of tables, each with a few data, but their mappings and underlying relationship are usually not explicitly-defined, making joins across multiple tables super slow Rather than "joins don't scale&
254.
by no-s 6y ago
memcached + rdbms is really super cheap and effective. Properly architected it can be tolerant of all sorts of latency/failure/CAP issues, up to some limits of course. there was a variant library that allowed you to replace memcac
255.
by no-s 6y ago
I mean to imply the principle transcends law, that the law does not provide the justification for the moral principle. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
256.
by no-s 6y ago
the barbies underlined that otherworldly air of surrealism you should employ when experiencing unfalsifiable claims of serialization...
257.
by no-s 6y ago
gotta name the release candidate "Joe"....
258.
by no-s 6y ago
>>pseudo-randomly sampled 30 videos... same here. I saw a couple out of 20 that looked like gratuitous police brutality. many were labeled as such and didn't seem likely. The deluge of irrelevant examples and confusing commentary
259.
by no-s 6y ago
Well, I don't know. Freedom of speech is also a principle. Public accommodation and non-discrimination are also principled. We don't need laws to see these as a public good. We shouldn't parse these ideas into orthogonal pret
260.
by no-s 6y ago
>> So you're kind of left to figure out all the little idioms and best practices for stack management all on your own. That was my experience learning Forth in the 80's. Initially I tried to add compositional features I was
261.
by no-s 6y ago
I'm pretty sure Rumsfeld was paraphrasing J.B.S Haldane from a ca. 1927 publication, or Eddington's paraphrase of Haldane's observation: "The Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose.
262.
by no-s 6y ago
>>If instead there is a single company that decides who gets to say what on their platform, and network effects build a castle wall, regulations should force a change (such as opening the protocol) to make alternatives viable. yeah, t
263.
by no-s 6y ago
hey! if fact-checking is a service, they could un-bundle it. Let the user choose! Let Twitter and Facebook and etc be platforms after all!
264.
by no-s 6y ago
This is about Twitter trying to pick winners and losers in the marketplace of attention. I don't think the Feds will have to dig very deep to find a cause for action. Twitter has conceivably already crossed the line to become a publish
265.
by no-s 6y ago
My basic education in computer science consisted of going to the university library starting about 1977 and reading dusty old ACM and IEEE journals. I already knew how to program, my initial interest was following up an academic reference o
266.
by no-s 6y ago
>>smart people were working with computers since they were invented Smart people were working with computers before they were invented. Consider the Difference engine, or the Antikythera mechanism, Analog computers, and efforts to org
267.
by no-s 6y ago
>>I shared an interesting anecdote with minimal relevant details and I get told how we did it all wrong. No, didn't really mean it personally despite my exasperated tone and abuse of pronouns. Sorry. You put it out there and I as
268.
by no-s 6y ago
>>We could have designed for this audience, but at the expense of more numerous, savvy users. Of course, that could be interpreted as snide. Very snide. Pardon me, I feel I must respond from a perhaps cynical perspective, but in the s
269.
by no-s 6y ago
it kills me how whenever one raises a question or criticism about the potential for voter fraud in mail-in voting a huge cloud of vitriol descends upon them. It shouldn't be necessary to prove that voter fraud exists in order to wonder
270.
by no-s 6y ago
>>Implication of Response: Where is the evidence that this is inferior to industry? A meta implication is that expert models were insufficient to inform decisions.

More ›